You seem to have a very narrow view of what is a relevant or a valid comment. Just because a counterargument doesn't completely refute the original comment, or "introduces" new concepts, doesn't make it irrelevant or "misdirection".

Someone compared treatment of X 20 years ago to treatment of Y today -- seems pretty natural to bring up treatment of X more recently. You can't just say "the original comment didn't mention it so you can't mention it either".

I don't see how your accusations of bad faith are warranted.