In synchronous computer-mediated contexts, peer-to-peer interaction at the microlevel has received little scrutiny. In applying a conversation analysis approach, this study scrutinizes the precise nature of peer-to-peer advice giving and receiving. In this process, an advice giver can be viewed at certain moments as more competent to evaluate a recipient's essay and to provide advice, while the recipient can be positioned as being less knowledgeable. Therefore, the present study focuses on the following research question: How did advice givers and recipients manage the asymmetrical participant roles inherent in L2 peer response? More specifically, this study explores the relationship between institutional roles and social relationships during advising episodes by investigating three single cases of dyadic pairs in an ESL university writing classroom. We show the ambiguity arising in interactions as novice advice givers attempt to balance criticism with the maintenance of harmonious interpersonal relationships, offering compliments rather than straightforward advice.