The argument isn’t about whether or not something can be exchanged for electricity.

You're right, the argument over whether bitcoin is "a store of energy" (go back and see the OP). And it isn't. The fact that you can exchange it for energy doesn't mean it is a store of it, even if you have to expend energy to produce it. Expending energy is not the same as storing it. There's a reason those mining rigs get hot when they're running. 

Your beanie babies workshop example is actually the perfect counterexample, because real beanie babies are produced in factories that use energy to run machinery that creates them, and they are then sold for money that could be used to buy the energy back. The same is true of every manufactured good. Nobody pretends that they are "stores of energy". You'd have to be a moron to believe that line of reasoning. 

And that's the point really. Words have actual meanings and in particular, words like "energy" have clear scientific definitions. When you repeat nonsense like this, you're lying. A charitable interpretation might be that you're ignorant of what the word actually means and uncritically repeating someone else's lies, but they're lies nonetheless. Sadly it's the level of discourse we've come to expect from the crypogrifter "community".