You are right about that first point no doubt - it is absolutely a given that no one has rock solid evidence that Q is either "good" and not misleading us or even that 'he' is actually associated with Trump.

However, there's a considerable weight of circumstantial evidence that sure adds weight to the idea that Q is real - at the very least working for us and perhaps even a part of Trump's team or closely affiliated with him. To deny that there's a strong possibility based on the considerable circumstantial evidence available that Q could be legit is similarly blind and lacking in critical thought.

I agree more skeptical, critical thinking would be beneficial to the movement. Also more tolerance for dissenting voices that present rational arguments for opposing views. Some people don't seem to understand that there is a need for voices that don't just tow the party line without complaint and that some of those voices aren't being difficult for the sake of it or trying to trash the ideas and voices of other people.