True, and yes I WAS trying to imply that opposing the representation or rights of minority populations is reprehensible.
To me, though, that also doesn't seem like a very controversial statement. It seems like something anyone who is opposed to prejudice would say, and prejudice is not only illogical -- but the action of prejudice is often immoral.

That's the thing though, I addressed every single one of the author's arguments. How can you say I used this in order to not address the arguments if I addressed all of them individual.

I suppose you could argue I am sowing a seed... However, that very description of the word woke is precisely what the article in question was discussing. " But this is not, apparently, how MediaVsReality is using the word," see but that's not what I said, that is in fact EXACTLY how they used the word. They used it exactly in-line with my definition.

Imagine if I was talking to a KKK member and in advance I said " they believe in white purity, which I'm not sure what that means but given the name I am assuming it means keeping the white race pure." And then proceeded to debunk a bunch of points about why we should keep the white race pure... Would that really be poisoning the well if the description was accurate to what they believe?

I'm sorry, but I don't agree.