At first, you "agreed" with the member that his "case" should be resolved. Then, after providing proof, Tracy asked you if you should consider it resolved, and you acted like you didn't know what was going on, and made a huge 180 for who you support.
No offense, it just looks like you suck whatever balls hang in front of you.
Tracy does a great job of defending QSC... he doesn't need any help. In fact, if you want to help, he would rather you left a FULL review.
However, sometimes members need help, even if they are wrong or make a mistake. As you can see, other members chimed in about cryptos.
Picking a side "willy-nilly" with the source looks "fishy," makes you look bad, and does not help the source. You're not required to do either, but: help a member if needed; leave a full review for the source.