I am not sure I agree. Let us say there are two arguments for design, A1 and A2. Let us say that A1 is a good argument, but A2 is a bad argument. What value is their in associating with an organization that promotes both A1 and A2, even going so far as to prohibit internal critique of A2? This ends up polluting trust in A1. Wouldn’t you trust someone merely making the A1 argument, and leaving the A2 argument in the dust? Now multiply A2 times 50, to proliferate bad arguments. What value is there now in staying? The fact that A1 is valid does not help much.
As for this situations e are looking at now, at appears that @Mung things that ID is ultimately right, but all their arguments are wrong. Now, we do not even have A1 to redeem the effort, just the fact that the final conclusion is the same all around.
It just seems more rational to take my path (and it appears your path too @glipsnort) of staying away from ID as a movement, even though believe God created us.