This is somewhat tongue in cheek step by step guide to Christian online ‘discussions’.
Step one: Be a big name & say something authentic that you are thinking, whether good or bad.
Step two: Another big name of a different camp and most likely the opposite viewpoint will fire a shot across the other’s bow.
Step three: Cue the lemmings, erg, I mean sheep. These will be 4 groups: Calvinists, non-Calvinists, Crying Christians and Commentators.
Step four: Go Sodom & Gomorra on the ‘bad’ Christian… I mean issue goes viral… If Calvinist call him or her a bully and drudge up everything bad he’s done. If non-Calvinist label him or her a heretic and question their salvation. If a fundamentalist or flaming liberal laugh, roll eyes, controversy ends. If mainstream…
Step five: Lemm…sheep begin defending their ‘side’ and the issues are clarified. As a bonus sometimes a never intended issue gets thrown in.
Step six: Cry babies swarm and state to this effect: “This is why people don’t like Christians.” The other three groups roll their eyes thinking “Debate is normal and authentic. Yes it’s hard, but it’s part of life.”
Step seven: Commentators chime in dealing with root issues and a good discussion ensues.
Step eight: Both sides in their networks will joke about it, learn from it, and all parties are better off.
Step nine: It’s forgotten soon afterwards as a blog/Facebook post/Tweet isn’t something to get all worked up over.
T.Woznek 
You may be on to something here. It would be interesting to use it as a template to place over eras of church history. The thing is, now, what took ten years in my youth can unfold (or unravel) in ten hours or less in this day of the speedy media. Sad that it didn’t exist around 325 ad. A lot of the big names might not have carried as much weight once the lemm…sheep decided their voice lacked authenticity.