Fangthane

Which makes the denunciations in your previous post more than a little premature. There's entirely too much we don't know, so it's foolish to rush to smear his character based completely on silence. While Sloan's history doesn't tell the whole story of any given situation he's in, it seems the epitome of foolhardiness to presume any story he chooses to present makes up the whole truth, especially when he has no apparent interest in posting the communications that really get into the meat of the matter - notice how he stopped off right at the point where it seems the conflict was most likely to begin.

Assuming they actually are business partners, the simple act of Evan trying to get resolution isn't in any way inherently wrong. Steve may very well prefer that he just shut up and let this play out in the background - which might explain why he doesn't seem to have access to any emails that prove his version of events - but being in a partnership would give him a real stake in this. He's repeatedly shown that he's not a reasonable person who'll take other people's thoughts into consideration, in lieu of the knee-jerk reactions that always seem to be his wont.
Just as you're apparently presuming that there isn't one, because Evan said that there is? So long as we're not privy to anything remotely resembling the whole story, it's way early to be spearheading a campaign against the one principal who we don't actually know to be dishonest. Maybe he is just a weak-willing person who removed himself from the situation out of sheer frustration and inability to effectively handle conflict; content to sic his attack dog on Sloan. Of course, there's also the very real possibility that he is pursuing this legally. I don't think there's nearly enough credible information to draw a very reliable inference from his current lack of participation.
Apparently being a business owner, who I suspect may have some money to play with, he may well already have had an attorney on retainer. I'm guessing that all the talk of mail fraud is just Stahl spouting his usual mindless bluster to try to bluff his way into a conclusion.

Why would Steve possibly choose to spend more than the actual value of the snakes in legal fees? Might as well ask why Ty Park is willing to do the same so he can hold into a lizard that ultimately cost him nothing. While always interesting to know, even if just for posterity's sake, the "why" isn't terribly important. It may just be seen as a small price to pay for the smiting of one's enemy.

I'd have to say that it's less odorous than the idea that a buyer would just randomly drop all communication without expressing dissatisfaction with the status quo. When given the choice between the pictures painted by two people with very questionable motives and character, I think that certain aspects of Stahl's are just more plausible than anything Sloan's put forth. He could easily have posted screenshots that would put any debate to rest, but he chose to be sidetracked by someone in the peanut gallery. Yet another context clue that seems to be pretty telling.