[vertere]

You seem to have a very narrow view of what is a relevant or a valid comment. Just because a counterargument doesn't completely refute the original comment, or "introduces" new concepts, doesn't make it irrelevant or "misdirection".

Someone compared treatment of X 20 years ago to treatment of Y today -- seems pretty natural to bring up treatment of X more recently. You can't just say "the original comment didn't mention it so you can't mention it either".

I don't see how your accusations of bad faith are warranted.

[ricardo81]

If your doubts are true, why did you have to introduce an analogy?

I feel I have a pretty open view.

And, there's no definition of a 'valid' comment. I'll address points, raise points or whatever. Sorry, I'm not in the realm of 'valid' comments, never was.

[JumpCrisscross]

> why did you have to introduce an analogy?

GP made a comparison! How do you refute a comparison without criticising the comparison?

> I'm not in the realm of 'valid' comments, never was

Claiming misdirection is an argument about validity.