Irrelevant. The persons whose behavior is described in my posts are numbered alt.atheists. No matter how many alt.atheists don't do X, the fact that two or more do X enables me to truthfully say that alt.atheists do X. As I showed in my example, you are the one making the generalization based upon the specifics. I am consistently referring to specifics.

The case is dismissed as between Jones and Smith. (makes explicit that the case is continued between other parties to the litigation)

Especially ITC show antimicrobial and antinematicidal activities, thereby being promising biofumigants.

That guy just got domed!