Is OTHER wrong in the post ? POST : I graduated uni in 2017 with a compsci degree. Part of leading up to it was a capstone project. I was kind of thrown into the "remainders" group, or a group of people who didn't come up with a group themselves. Only two of us six knew each other and the rest were strangers (I was one of the strangers). We picked roles early on and my job was technical writer (writing documents and manuals).

It became evident early on that not everyone pulled their weight. Of the six of us, I did my role, the lead programmer (LP) did their role, the team leader (TL) was active, and the other three didn't do much. I want to focus on the TL as being a good leader but other than verbal input, had nothing in the project. The other three did their work but it was really poor quality or outright didn't work: LP, TL and I had to redo their work.

Or so I thought. The TL mentioned at every group meeting he had to redo x, y, or z but we learned after the fact he did not. He and LP were friends and I guess LP did all that extra work and TL took credit for it. TL was still active and went to every group meeting and was involved in discussions, but we all were.

About halfway through the 8 month course, TL stopped showing up unless it was a meeting with the professor. He continually took credit for work he didn't do, even once going as far as saying he did everything. If you were to split the project into four parts: programming parts 1, 2, and 3, and the documentation, I ended up doing part 1 and all the writing, and LP did part 2, and one of the other three stood up to the plate late in the course and did part 3.

TL ended up vanishing more or less. With a few weeks left, he stopped showing up or replying to e-mails. LP caught him once and he said that he's happy with how the course went and there's no way we can fail, so he's taking a step back.

When it came time to do group evaluations, here's how it worked: the project was worth x marks, and we would grade each other from 0% to whatever%, and you would get that mark based off x. If the project was graded an 80, and collectively your peers gave you 50%, you'd instead only get 40. But if you got 200%, you'd get 160, etc. The caveat is your total amount had to add up to 100 times the number of group members. So if you gave someone an extra 1%, you had to take it away from someone else.

I ended up giving LP 180%, that third guy who picked up the slack 150%, the two other guys who didn't do much (but still participated throughout the whole course with discussions) 85%, and TL 0%. His average group evaluation ended up being 20%, low enough that he failed the course and allegedly his average dropped enough that he lost a scholarship. TL ended up having a falling out with LP and now LP and I are pretty good friends.

AITA for basically deciding TL's fate? He had to return for an extra year, pay the tuition all over again, and this time without scholarships. He was active in the first half of the course but never more than a guidance/discussion role. Maybe the biggest asshole part of me was we all made a silent pack between ourselves to give him a bad grade but told him we didn't care for group evaluations and were going to give everyone 100%.

**tl;dr:** capstone group project for university. One member did basically nothing but take credit so I gave him a 0%, ensuring he failed the class and lost a scholarship. AITA for going overboard?