Which is usually due to the incessant posts about Rome, often advertising her or defending her doctrine, which invites refutations,
You mean like this one from a few days ago:
"Pope: Historical Divisions Among Christians One of the Most Serious Sins that Disfigure Church"
Luther was a sinner for posting his 95 Theses on the door of Wittenburg Church, exposing Rome's sins, their indulgences, etc.? The rest of the Protestants are sinners in refusing to be subservient to the Pope of Rome?
Well, you must understand that without the sanction of those who were the instruments and stewards of God's revelation, and were the inheritors of Divine promises, and could claim historical descent, then you simply have no authority.
And to dare to reprove such by Scripture, and establish your claims upon it, as if that was the supreme authority, but that those who sat in power did not possess assured veracity - which they had to have since writings were established as Scripture under them - marks you as a rebel. You simply cannot begin a church in dissent from such.
And which is why Rome would have dealt with a certain Itinerant Preacher from Galilee thusly:
"And they come again to Jerusalem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to him the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders, And say unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things? " (Mark 11:27-28)
See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2975555/posts?page=2789#2789 for more, and while Reformers come far short of being Jesus (much more Rome), the principle remains.
Worthy is the Lamb that wast slain to receive power...