No, that's not a reasonable thing you're saying. That you can say foo about A and foo about B, the fact that saying foo about B is false does not imply that saying foo about A is false.
Strawman. The argument is that they are very similar situations with similar downsides and shoddy defenses. The argument is not that the defenses being wrong about C proves that they're wrong about Go.
That was not their logic. They were not depending on a fallacy. The comparison with C was not the basis of the argument. They were merely giving an example of a similar situation.
