This aptly sums up what I will want to respond here but did not think it would be worth it, especially as this ↓ is why they think they were tagged in the first place, despite the several pages worth of responses in the earlier thread about the case.

They could be said to deserve a tag only off their unprofessional-ism in handling the entire case and their willingness to bulge in their assessment of the case. They never wanted arbitration and turned on everyone when they did not exactly get the response they expected. I will not be tagging the new brand, but the tag on the Fairlay account is still valid in my opinion.

- Jay -