So when Google locks someone’s account, it’s never because their automated systems are being overzealous or misinterpreted data, but because Google is choosing to be deliberately evil towards that person?
If the cashier at the supermarket rings up something wrong, do they have something against you specifically?
More importantly, do you never make a mistake when interacting with a stranger? If we meet and you make an error during our interaction should I assume you did it on purpose to screw me over?
A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".
The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition.
Copy-pasting a fallacy definition doesn’t make it true, nor does it advance a conversation.
If you believe my comment was unconnected, consider you might not have understood what I meant (then ask for clarification) or that I might not have understood your original point (then clarify it).
Don’t start by assuming malice from the other person, or a productive discussion becomes impossible.
Sounds like a feature, from Microsoft’s point of view. Hanlon’s Razor¹ is a good rule of thumb but Microsoft is no stranger to dark patterns².
¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_pattern