I get depressed .....

Just so you are aware, cupcakes has never been arguing for strictly deterministic compatibilist free will. He has taken issue with any claims that have been made that our decisions are the product of deterministic processes, and says that the conclusion drawn from the Libet experiments are incorrect. He's trying to save face. I have never denied the existence of 'compatibilist free will', because that concept is reshaping the definition of 'free will' and then applying it to something which is known to exist. Therefore, it has absolutely nothing to do with evidence for or against the proposition.

I've been very careful, on countless occasions to be sure that he wasn't just arguing for compatibilist free will, and he has roundly rejected compatibilism on many occasions, whilst remaining vague on what he personally actually means by 'free will'. I hope that you don't think that I'm so dense as to be misconstruing what someone is referring to after 2 years of discussion of the same topic. Cupcakes is conscious that he would look like an idiot if you actually realised what he means when he defends free will, and he wants to avoid that ignominy.