My brother was a sharp wit. So I'll borrow from him again as it applies.
Regarding the "Reasoned discourse" which was anything but..
It wasn't a total failure, as it can stand as an example of what not to do.
Or maybe, Those that repeat history are doomed to finally learn it.
May favorite was, In a battle of wits, you are unarmed, go away, quickly.
He was of no patience with those that made claims and not much else.
Bottom line it was the old rehash of Usenet troll post of leading with ideology, beliefs and some fragmentary statistics and engaging in a flamewar unprepared. Back in the Usenet days we had users that were likely experts in a wide range of fields and also good at spotting falsity and poorly thought out claims. The trolls would bring in their shills and often would get caught. In the end they were often exposed or badly ridiculed.
At the start it was clear, censorship and veiled agenda. The mind wasn't open as it required looking at many things that didn't fit the faith based model. Those that took the ball off her court got their full say and agree or not the First amendment was upheld.
I'll throw the first bone. Japete, I will defend to the end your right to say anything be it outrageous or simply poorly thought out. The expectation is you must honor that as well. All else is dishonorable.
Incoming, check six..