Such a wording would completely remove the appeal to provide a argued reason as to why implementing this proposal has utility.

Disagree. It establishes your opinion that this proposal wouldn't be of high value, and thereby appeals the other person to state their reasons for disagreeing, if they have any.

I don't see anything wrong with asking a person who proposed something to argue why implenting his proposal has value.

I don't argue that Douglas Reay isn't worthy of speaking but encourage him to speak more.

I'm not objecting to what you said, just to the way you said it. After reading your follow-up comments, I acknowledge that you did not intend your comment as a status move for silencing him, but this was non-obvious to me from just the initial comment.