Is someone who insists 2+2 to be 4 also to be considered "The Judge, above the other party"? Afterall, the person did generalise. That is a fact. It is not a subjective judgment. They have since evaded (and continue to do so). That is also a fact and not a subjective judgment. Care to argue that they haven't? True, I've gone past wanting to discuss the issue of the OP with LG - and the issue of his evasion has taken over. That much is patently clear. So I continue to highlight his tactic of evasion and his intellectual dishonesty. He could end it just by either retracting the generalisation or actually supporting it. Should be simple enough for him. Instead he continues to evade. But if we follow your tack then every generalisation and other logical fallacy should just go unchallenged merely so the "discussion" can progress. And those discussions are inherently doomed to irrelevancy once logical fallacies are thus permitted.