It's a version of the Argument by Generalization: you show that one of the arguments is fallacious and generalize that everything the other has said must be fal

It's a version of the Argument by Generalization: you show that one of the arguments is fallacious and generalize that everything the other has said must be fallacious. The generalization might be merely implied, by not responding to other arguments. BTW, you are aware that 'cites an obscure logical fallacy in order to sound more intelligent' is something between an ad hominem and a red herring, because you draw attention to the supposed, morally questionable, intentions of the other, rather than face the fallacy head on?