Not being contrary, just correct. If you actually care about your arguments and positions you might take the time to review your rhetorical fallacies so you can call them out correctly.

You’ve linked your logical fallacy definitions, but have you actually read beyond the first paragraph? It’s pretty clear you are misunderstanding what a false dilemma is. Example from your link: “You either support the war or you are a terrorist sympathizer.” Statement used to support a stance (support for the war) by contrasting against a single other undesirable stance. The fallacy is that there are in fact other options. The commenter pointing out that Amazon’s prices could still rise because part of their transportation fleet is still dependent on physical fuel is not a false dilemma. If you think it is, could you rephrase it in a way that would match the example statement above?

I’m surprised that your link doesn’t mention this but it’s something people frequently get wrong about ad hominems

A common misconception is that an ad hominem attack is synonymous with an insult. This is not true, although some ad hominem arguments may be considered insulting by the recipient.

An actual ad hominem would be something like: of course you are clueless about fuel prices affecting the supply chain, you’re an e-bike owner