The debacle (debacle for the Andyites) is still up, but few comments added since early this morning.
The Andyites are trying a common tactic, trying to put the side of ethics and honesty on the defensive--something this side has fallen for, at times--when it is not the side of ethics and honesty that needs defending.
The Andyites made the claims (the round red one has pancreatic cancer, the round red one needs money), not the other side--and so it is up to the Andyites to prove those claims, not for us to disprove them.
They have a severe difficulty with that idea.
Also, comprehending that Andy made himself and his prognosis a public concern when he asked for donations. Demanding to know the identity of those asking questions is a smokescreen. Saying the public has no right to answers is completely wrong.
One poster, while refusing to answer the 3 questions claimed the entire process had been transparent. Clear cognitive dissonance.
Finally, the seemingly clear-thinking poster near the end admits every single one of our concerns is legitimate and that Andy has given the impression of shenanigans and should provide the information in order to end the situation, and yet persists in calling the questioners "trolls." "Truthseekers." Ha.
SD