You are correct; but the Argument from fallacy is still pretty uninformative.
Agreed. But it kind of means that some evolution of fallacies trending toward more complex argumentation patterns is taking place. Or? I’m not versed in the classics but I take it that they didn’t have this large an (anti-)tool-set.
I think any preoccupation, if it exists long enough, results in great refinements. The are people good a African rare languages, mineral water, all sorts of (noble!) sports, torture—why should’t people get better at something as common as argumentation.
But we’re advocating a look the other way around, to the more basic processes, they may say something about how humans work. And indeed, it would be easier with less sophisticated arguers.