What fallacy could this be?

#1) Person 1: Shares a fake conspiracy theory article on FB. 

#2) Person 2: Copies and pasts a fact checker, fact checking it and also a copied and pasted link to this website with the conspiracy theory fallacy. 

#3) Person 1:  "You are wasting your time trying to change my mind with the cut and paste with no factual information."

#4) Person 2: " Using your own logic here. Since you cut and pasted this conspiracy theory article, that must mean it’s not factual and that you will not accept it."

#5) Person 1: "All I did was repost it, no cutting and pasting."

What fallacy is #5? Cutting and pasting has the same ends as reposting. So, to claim that information is not acceptable and fake just because it was cut and pasted, but claim that information that is reposted is acceptable and factual doesn't seem logically consistent. 

#6 Then Person 3 steps in and says: "it's all in the eye of the beholder. You say it's conspiracy theory and may be right. There are a ton of people who also believe it is exposing propaganda. There is just as much evidence to support either point of view."

#3) Person 1:  "You are wasting your time trying to change my mind with the cut and paste with no factual information."

Genetic Fallacy. Just because the link was 'cut and paste' doesn't mean it contains "no factual information".

 "All I did was repost it, no cutting and pasting."

Double Standard. Effectively cutting and pasting is also 'reposting', since you're re-publishing information that someone else put up. This person is trying to apply uneven standards where the situations are the same in practice, and should be subject to the same standard.

"it's all in the eye of the beholder. You say it's conspiracy theory and may be right. There are a ton of people who also believe it is exposing propaganda. There is just as much evidence to support either point of view."

Firstly, a "ton of people" believing something won't make it more true (though I'll assume this isn't part of the argument). While the principles of freedom of expression and freedom of opinion allow everyone to decide what to believe, not all beliefs are valid, and necessarily as valid as each other (verisimilitude). To imply this leads us to False Equivalence.

Furthermore, judging by person #6's non-commitment to a solid view, we can suggest the fallacy of Failure to Assert.