Ad Hominem is a logical fallacy. Unless the OP was saying "The judge is wrong because he's seventy years old" he was not committing ad hominem, just commenting on a (possibly irrelevant) quality of the judge.
What he didn't do is to use the judge's age in support of the first argument -- that would have been ad hominem.
he didnt: "[use] the judge's age in support of the first argument"
forgive me; perhaps you could clarify the difference?
Fact is having a second means to communicate (a .me or whatever address) doesn't mean speech isn't an issue here.
http://www.thedomains.com/2011/08/05/federal-court-rules-dom...
> My opponent is an idiot and believes X to be true, therefore X is false. (ad hominem)
and
> X is false. My opponent believes X to be true, therefore they are an idiot. (Not ad hominem.)