How would you know?
Your ignorance of the one fallacy you've referred to has now been proven beyond any dispute.
Do you now get credibility for expanding on your proven ignorance?
You are thrashing.
You were wrong in the one example you gave. Even so, your broader false dichotomy (If you were wrong on one, you were wrong on all) fails on its face.
Don’t try to argue logic via wikipedia. Either you know it or you do not.
You do not and your increased display of ignorance does you, me and FR no good.
>Your ignorance of the one fallacy you’ve referred to has now been proven beyond any dispute.<<
Your misunderstanding of the fallacy at hand doth not make my analysis invalid.
>>Do you now get credibility for expanding on your proven ignorance?<<
You don’t really “get” false dichotomy, do you?