"I guess I don't know what the right answer would have been. What the right thing to do would have been," said Baker to KARE 11 News, in a far more calm and collected manner than many of us likely would've managed -- although she admittedly still isn't planning to pay the bill.
Granted, Baker probably should've contacted her friend and explained the no-show, but it seems a bit silly to retroactively charge someone for a thing they wouldn't have had to pay for in the first place.
Where do you fall on this contentious issue? Let us know in the comments below:
Sign up here for our daily Thrillist email, and get your fix of the best in food/drink/fun.
Gianni Jaccoma is a staff writer for Thrillist, and he thinks this story smells a little fishy. Follow his suspicious tweets @gjaccoma, and send your news tips to firstname.lastname@example.org