You're not quite right on what a strawman fallacy is, either. It's:
Someguy forwards x.
Strawmanner attacks and defeats y.
Strawmanner claims he has defeated x.
Your strawman example is:
Someguy forwards x.
Strawmanner attacks and defeats y.
Strawmanner claims he has defeated y.
Which is not a logical fallacy, just missing the point. (Even if one argues there is an implicit rejection present, I think there is an implicit argument in your first example, but you treat it formally [as if it only means what it literally says] so you can't really assume an implicit message elsewhere.)
Just how do you explain the origins of your
extremely logical mind, Alcon? Have you considered becoming a philosophy major? You just might be good enough to get one of those handful of tenured professorial positions in academia.
