I'm still not sure that what you started was a debate.
I'd imagine someone who wanted to start a debate would be asking questions such as....
Why do we use the phraseology we do?
Why are we so reliant on standard phraseology?
Is there anything we can use to supplement it?
And one might also put forwards one's own point of view......
I believe it's naive to rely on standard R/T, because......
Here's what I'd like to see done.....etc etc.
in UK airspace we rely far too much on phraseology, and neglect many many other area's.....
.....such as.......
I'm all for improving 'airmanship', I see good and bad examples of that every day I'm at work. A few things worry me. I cannot communicate with flight crew by using 'airmanship'. I only have my voice, and when I'm talking to a crew from Azerbijan, or China, or the Peruvian State Flight, I use standard phraseology because some of these crew will only know maybe fifty words of standard aviation English.
Why is it such a bad thing if we use standard R/T and encourage/train good airmanship at the same time? I don't want to start thinking "Ahh, a British crew, I can just talk normally to them, but the next one's a Turkish, so I'll have to use standard phraseology to him...."