Say Tim is a fascist. The argument is wrong because he’s a fascist and I can recognise that at a larger ontological level. My response is “Tim, you’re a doodoo head and I’m not going to bother with you.” Is that still fallacious in that I’m making a leap from a logos argument to a pathos one which shuts down the entire debate for the purpose of attacking him? To me it’s fallacious even if I’m right because I’m going against the spirit of jerking each other off in a debate where two mutually-exclusive ideas are valid. I just embrace the fallacy because dada.