Cofty,
Firstly, although the OP does not mention theology, the topic it is under can be regarded as the context. Lucky I only whispered, but no strawman, agreed.
Second “bad ideas”. If an idea or belief is asserted as reality on a religious forum it is of course open to debate. But the term “bad ideas” is still a tad Orwellian and intimidating. After all, positing unconventional ideas as theorems is a necessary part of scientific advance.
Thirdly, my alleged “obsession with tone”. No apologies, that is indeed the main issue for me. Debate is one thing, but using putdowns and assumptions of authority and/or superior understanding will intimidate people struggling to rebuild their ideas and many whose first language is not English. Worse, these tactics encourage other posters to go the step further to name-calling and outright insults.
IMO, calling the debate “robust” or “vigorous” in no way justifies such tactics.
“ridiculing” is actually a bit more difficult. Reductio ad absurdum is a valid form of argument, but ridicule is also very likely to evoke a personal reaction, and therefore risky at best. Risky, that is, if the aim is to get a person to think beyond his/her boundaries, rather than to ‘win’.
Happy to discuss further if you wish, Retro.