I do.  It's a diversionary tactic.   Since the writer cannot answer the issues you and I have raised, he is diverting the debate to a new, red herring topic.   All Wikipeida editors write about topics that they fancy.  This is not a problem.  In fact, it is an asset since when we care about a topic, we are more likely to have the facts at our fingertips.   The problems come with poor editing and poor logic, such as voting to keep articles that appear to favor one's personal political convictions, and to delete those that don't - and devil take the rules.  Some editors will try everything in an AFD, shifting their arguments, false arguments, strawman arguments, personal attacks, outright untruths (I have pointed out 2 outright assertions of untruth in ADD's this week alone), and good red herring to get an article deleted when the only real argument they have is Wikipedia:I just don't like it.