They did answer the question, and did so in good faith. This comment however is fairly confusing. There's a reason that our government institutions can't perform espionage on anyone they feel like without at least passing through some check(warrant). The same seems valid here, people have a fundamental right to privacy, and this seems aimed at violating that right, not only of the first recipient, but of another person as well. Given that this is being done without some sort of additional check, or through channels that our branches of government have approved, that certainly doesn't seem ethical to me.
Simply not liking someone's argument doesn't mean they didn't answer your question or are arguing in bad faith. To automatically assume that would imply that you are the one arguing in bad faith.
In case you decide to answer that question eventually, the model ethics rules are here: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibili...
I would really be interested in knowing which one you're alleging was violated.