My questions are genuine, as I am educating myself to try the 22CM. Your assumption that every question is leading and not genuine is not correct.
I ask for more details, especially with failures, to see if another shooter's results or experience is valid for me to use as educational. Failure statements like "they did not see the bullet impact" or "bullet did not give an exit wound", are not caliber or bullet failures to me; those are the shooter's expectations, so I discount those results.
A statement of "perfect environment and did not perform" is of no value to me, so I ask clarifying questions, which becomes a high shoulder shot that then eventually becomes a no bone impact only tissue, so that's not a caliber or bullet failure that's most likely a shooter issue, so I discount that experience.
Looking at the tallied "Failures" in this message string, I primarily see shooter's expectation failures.
I do not automatically assume that everything someone says is true and represents usable data. The great thing about RS is the trend of providing raw data, such as pictures, for people to make decisions and test for themselves. I learned a long time ago that there's a reason why someone gets upset and defensive about being questioned about their results or story.
The best thing we can do is continue providing good data. If you want to prove that magnums kill better, show the data. If you want to show the effectiveness of smaller calibers, show the data. Whether you will use or ignore the data is your call.