Garrett; You're right, this ground has been covered. All I can say is that you think you know more (Philosophy 1 perhaps?) about logic than you actually demonstrate.
1) Ad hominem arguments fall into several categories. The most common, sometimes called "genetic," is based on qualities or characteristics of your opponent (occupation, political affiliation, gender, race etc.) rather than dealing with the argument itself. The next most common is a statement that's abusive, mocking, or inflamatory toward the maker, rather than dealing with the argument. Phrases like "intellectually bankrupt" "your Victorian brutality," and "inane rambling," while colorful, are not confronting the argument, they are characterizing the maker. Asking if your opponent has read the labels on his clothing may be sarcasm (or in my case it was sincere, because many people don't), but it's not Ad hominem. to get a grip on this, recommend a good logic text (I still like Copi), or better, go check with your (former?) professor.
2) Fallacies as Appeals to Authority are of the form, "you're wrong because X supports my claim." X can be the maker, if he/she is an expert, or President Bush, or anyone who is represented as having special circumstances/power. AA's are not equivalent to providing inductive evidence for premises, in the form of data: numbers, interviews, articles that address the issue. That's actually what we're supposed to do when we argue, not imitate Bill O'Reilly.
The standard for evidence - what's "good enough" to support a premise - varies from place to place. If you haul out quotes and citations over a beer at the local pub, they'll think you're certifiable. Or just full of yourself. Not many folks see Epic as a place that needs formal citations either; most of us have better things to do, and anyway, how do we know you're not a 12 year old girl and I'm not a 82 year old spinster who's never left Des Moines? Should we have sponsors? The B.S. filters are more about how we evaluate stuff that others also experience. If you don't like what I say about AC40's, don't believe a word I say...
So my failure to provide citations is not an Appeal to Authority, although if this were a scholarly debate in a journal, the reviewers, after picking themselves up off the floor from laughing, would exect citations. It isn't, you can dig them out yourself or not, depending on how much free time you have. Maybe sometime I'll post a pic from China for everyone's who waiting with baited breath to see if I've actually been there. If I can get the damn link function to work.
3) My occupation is relevant only inductively, and only if I make a factual claim centered around it ("This premise is true because I'm a (ski-maker/ car-maker/ Chinese factory owner) and I made what you're talking about." I did not make such a claim. Whether you paste the little sarcasm smilie or not, my occupation has no bearing whatsoever on deductive arguments unless you want to go Ad hominem. Again, if the difference between induction and deduction eludes you, go check with your prof/text.
4) Sorry if I repeated myself or forgot the details of your old posts about buying American/European. Clearly this is a Real Issue for you. Again, don't think that's a logical problem on my part, just not having the interest to dredge up old threads. Best luck in your quest to stay pure Euro-American.