Thanks you for your kind offer, but it is not necessary.  However, let me enlighten you a bit on the subject:

Spurious argument:
An effective spurious argument is one that sounds valid to the audience that is not.  Sadly, by definition there are many more arguments available to someone prepared to use spurious arguments. This is because a dishonest or ignorant debater can mix spurious and non-spurious argument. Spurious arguments are more effective the simpler or more concise the discussion as there is less opportunity to discuss the flaws in the assertions made.  This means that one can overwhelm an opponent with many spurious arguments before a single valid argument is presented.

Straw Man (Fallacy Of Extension):
attacking an exaggerated or caricatured version of your opponent's position.   For example, the claim that "evolution means a dog giving birth to a cat."  Another example: "Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I disagree entirely. I can't understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that."   On the Internet, it is common to exaggerate the opponent's position so that a comparison can be made between the opponent and Hitler.

Fallacy Of The General Rule:
assuming that something true in general is true in every possible case. For example, "All chairs have four legs." Except that rocking chairs don't have any legs, and what is a one-legged "shooting stick" if it isn't a chair ?   Similarly, there are times when certain laws should be broken. For example, ambulances are allowed to break speed laws.

Reductive Fallacy (Oversimplification):
over-simplifying. As Einstein said, everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler. Political slogans such as "Taxation is theft" fall in this category.

Argument From Spurious Similarity:
this is a relative of Bad Analogy. It is suggested that some resemblance is proof of a relationship. There is a WW II story about a British lady who was trained in spotting German airplanes. She made a report about a certain very important type of plane. While being quizzed, she explained that she hadn't been sure, herself, until she noticed that it had a little man in the cockpit, just like the little model airplane at the training class.

Causal Reductionism (Complex Cause):
trying to use one cause to explain something, when in fact it had several causes. For example, "The accident was caused by the taxi parking in the street." (But other drivers went around the taxi. Only the drunk driver hit the taxi.)

Argument By Repetition (Argument Ad Nauseam):
if you say something often enough, some people will begin to believe it.

Argument By Selective Observation:
also called cherry picking, the enumeration of favorable circumstances, or as the philosopher Francis Bacon described it, counting the hits and forgetting the misses. For example, a state boasts of the Presidents it has produced, but is silent about its serial killers. Or, the claim "Technology brings happiness". (Now, there's something with hits and misses.)

Argument By Generalization:
drawing a broad conclusion from a small number of perhaps unrepresentative cases. (The cases may be unrepresentative because of Selective Observation.) For example, "They say 1 out of every 5 people is Chinese. How is this possible ? I know hundreds of people, and none of them is Chinese." So, by generalization, there aren't any Chinese anywhere. This is connected to the Fallacy Of The General Rule.

Similarly, "Because we allow terminally ill patients to use heroin, we should allow everyone to use heroin."

But you should also note that most major corporations and megacorporations in RL do own or are invested in their suppliers (subsidiary corporations).

PS- We have diverged from the topic of this thread "Beta Islands should have no safe area"  I would recommend our time be better spent discussing the topic.