But I agree with you that the apologists will always be at a disadvantage because they have to argue for that which is not true.
Apologists for any religion are at a disadvantage. Think of any religious criticism. It is easy to make a simple criticism that often takes many pages of response. Defending is always tougher than taking the offensive. This may be why top LDS leadership steers clear of apologetic efforts. Rather they declare what they think is truth in an affirmative way.
But really what amazes me with some who want to crow about how false the LDS Church is and how they are so happy to lead people out of it is what do they offer? All religions have truths and false hoods. Kimberly had traded LDSism for a liberal protestant faith and if she is happy with that I am happy for her. But is her current truth TRUE? Is it without problems? One could argue that if the Christian message is false then it ought to be exposed and one of the most tragic cons heaped upon the world. If she really feels a need to lead people out more power to her. I wonder where she finds them all. I see little bleeding of this sort at least where I live. But to what end is often the question. 18 last year? Sounds like she is busy.