I basically am not gonna listen to anything you say that relates to ...

This is backwards. A semi-decidable problem gets an answer if the answer is Yes, but doesn't necessarily get an answer if the answer is No. You do want to listen to the answers of Yes for such problems, you just don't get to conclude a No from an absence of Yes, you do need an actual No for that (even as you don't necessarily get that No if the answer actually is No).

So you do want to listen to what Thomas is saying, you just don't get to conclude anything in particular based on the fact that Thomas isn't saying anything on some issue. Which isn't all that different from how you should calibrate for filtering in comments by anyone else, because people fail to say anything for all sorts of reasons, and so when they don't say anything, that usually doesn't mean anything relevant that can be usefully tallied by a non-superintelligent reader. In Thomas's case, not saying anything might point to a cause that's unusually relevant to the content of his withheld comments, but the fact of absence of a comment is still almost completely uninformative, similarly to someone else in particular not saying anything (such as me or you). This issue doesn't apply to Thomas actually saying something.