This is definitely the case. Most of the repeaters are incapable of following through or supporting the argument (in most cases, not even the original promulgat

This is definitely the case. Most of the repeaters are incapable of following through or supporting the argument (in most cases, not even the original promulgator could follow through in a rational discussion), and they have exactly one response: change the subject with another non-sequitur. It is a mistake to follow them into the change of subject, and the charity principle doesn't ask you to do so, as they have by then revealed their true intentions.