In defense of differing levels of service
In essence, this comes down to distilling various forms of "payment" not strictly monetary, but also social, educational, interpersonal compensation into a formula that constantly balances your needs against the needs or wants of others.
It's important to do this because in this world only those who understand a fair exchange are ones who should engage in one and who will also compensate fairly given the perceived benefit of the transaction.
No matter the situation, the social context, or your personal level of skill or experience, other human beings will always expect something from you and you must design a secret formula known only to you, and implied to the other party as to what that formula consists of. It must be kept secret for it to be effective across all transactions.
The formula must be based on your values. What you yourself actually care about most in reality before you will feel confident enough to execute on it without feeling the need to explain yourself to anyone. In fact explaining kind formula would eliminate your power to enforce it and must be avoided.
Also different contexts may require different formulas based on different needs and approaches. So differing levels of service are inherently baked into life, but unless you acknowledge this reality, you will never be in control.
As a simple example, if your child asks for a lollipop at a candy store you will respond differently if a friends child asks for a lollipop or a stranger asks for a lollipop or if a petulant aggressive child asks for a lollipop.
As tech workers we need to approach our employers in the same way. We need to modulate our level of service from zero to 100% to our employer depending on context, need and treatment of ourselves by the employer just as the employer modulates its commitment to us depending on its business or in some cases cultural/personal commitments and attitudes towards us personally and collectively as a work force.
A "square deal" only exists in a transaction if both parties perceive they are receiving their equal benefit from the transaction, even though the company makes billions and an employee makes mere salary. Each party has different criteria of satisfaction.
And this is where your values come in. For example if its really important to you that people are honest with you, then at the first sign of less than honest behavior you would decrease your level of service to a counter party in favor of engaging in transactions with more honest partners.
Just as an employer might see you showing up late to work and they value timeliness, would find ways to decrease your project critical work to offset the mismatch in values.
It's not necessary to severe ties necessarily at all when a decreased level of service will do just fine. This is not passive aggressive behavior, it's simply adjusting transaction boundaries to the scope that is warranted.
One more example I use is that if recruiters offer me lower rates than I'm worth I don't say no, I just respond much slower in the order of days to their emails and phone calls, prioritizing high paying work first. They get a lower level of service because they are worth less.
Don't advertise your levels of service but adhere to them consistently, people eventually get the point and you will be spending your time on things that matter more.