@empiricism Could it be that what you perceive as a "semantic" response addressing a "rather arbitrary point" is an example of them addressing the aspect of the post that was in *their* area of expertise or focus?

I wouldn't ever challenge a criminal defense lawyer on criminal law, but I've been studying federal free speech jurisprudence for years, so if they made a claim about criminal law that had a false tangent about speech law, I may be inclined to opine.