Re. "plurium interrogationum".
I have actually taught argumentative theory (and formal logic) two semesters at university level - and I think I have yet to see you use any term correctly.
This is a great example...
The fallacy of the complex question (let's use the English terms for now, shall we?) is a way to sneak in a premise and you then accuse me (in other terms, for once) of strawmanning you.
This is not the same thing.
If I ask a loaded question, I am trying to somehow force you to agree to a premise burried, either explicitly or implicitly, in that question.
If I am strawmanning you, I represent you stance as weaker than it is, or just assume a weaker version of it and answer directly.
I did neither.
I did not ask a loaded question, but rather a pointed one:
'...am I wrong that one does not need to outlaw cell phones if you are afraid of monstrous robots, or do you believe a cell phone can spontaneously transform (tm) into one?'
There is nothing buried in this, you do not have to accept any premise to understand it. There is, of course, a hidden analogy from cell phones to other, comparable cases - but there is nothing in the question which makes the assumption that all cases are analogous and you could, in fact, raise a valid response to it that there exists such non-analogous cases (you didn't, and I don't think you will).
The question actually works as a reductio ad absurdum - if your claim is really that one needs (as they did in the dune universe) to outlaw all machines in order to make sure they do not turn into a murderous, planet-spanning AI, then it would follow that such machines could somehow spontaneously transform into such a robotic murderer.
I did not make a strawman of your argument either, because I was asking you about it. If I had assumed (consciously) that your argument was weaker than it is, then I would be commited that fallacy. I did not, I was actually trying to reconstruct your argument as best I could - and I was asking if I got it right!!! If there was something I missed, please let me know.
PS: And please, please, start of at the easier end of the fallacies, if you have to quote them - I am not grading your homework again.
PPS: http://io.uwinnipeg.ca/~walton/papers%2 ... terrog.pdf