They didn’t avoid your argument and use your intellectual capacity as the reason for doing so. Instead they simply didn't respond to your points and insulted you on the way out. That is different to explaining on their way out that your intellectual capacity is the reason for not addressing those specific points. E.g. had they said “I’m not going to respond to these because you are (being polite) someone who lacks intellectual capacity” this would be an ad hominem: the avoidance is by means of an argument against the character of the person. And I do accept that if the ignoring of the person is complete then that is not a matter of simply avoiding the specific points, and is thus a separate matter, and not an AAH. It is a meta-issue to the actual debate at hand. But clearly only ignoring some points... that’s different. It does, you just have to recognise what constitutes an argument. Perhaps. But based on what was written it appears to be just an insult. As to say, there is no argument in what was written.