Do you even know what 'ad hominem' means? In an argument - I mean essentially within a debate context - when you make the person the argument (their character, or their supposed motivation) INSTEAD OF arguing their points {ie., this is your strategy} you are committing the fallacy argumentum ad hominem, argument to the person.
Here, there was no argument even being had. So if someone here attacked the character or motivation of someone for doing what they did, it's actually on point. We could see what it was, it was patently obvious. What a person did was the topic.
There is no fallacy in it, there is no need for a strategy, there is no point to argue. The whole thing that went on here was we didn't care to be baited into seeing... whatever it is on a Youtube video from a person who posts this with no engagement with the community at_all, and that the notion in the leading question was, well, kind of just vapid.
And so your use of the term is vapid.
You're offended? Well aren't you a delicate flower, yet you had to come in like you're telling people off. GFY.
You have either 1) contributed nothing to the forum whatsoever, or more likely 2) are a member here under another name who is hiding behind a sock puppet, too chickenshit to come in here to impugn people's integrity (to no particular gain or point, in the thread which had taken its natural course to absurdity since no one much cares about its beginnings) and bear the future weight of we knowing who did this.
Either way, feel free to stop visiting or whatever.