steelmanned to some degree it would be "do you have any evidence of this, because if that was true, I'd want to end that practice in my organization".

Nope, because InIn is basically Gleb and his wife, that's it, and he, of course, knows perfectly well how "that practice" works.

In any case, we've already circled around this mulberry bush. See e.g. starting from here and reading the replies, or follow the links upthread.

It's perfectly possible to speak the truth whilst being intellectually dishonest, you two could be arguing past each other

It is certainly possible to be dishonest while speaking the literal truth. However that's not called "arguing past each other", that's called deceit.