I second this.
For one thing, showing vulnerability is the way to get other people to open up with you. It's difficult to open up to people if you don't open up first, and if no one starts then the relationship just never gets deeper. This is exactly why a lot of "friendships" fail--because no emotional or personal experiences are shared, and therefore no trust can be built up. How many of you would feel you can trust someone who have never really told you about themselves? Like really told you about themselves, not just trivial things like their favourite colour or food or what courses they take, but their stories and experiences? How can you know what kind of person they are, whether they can be trusted with your secrets, if you don't have some past references or know what values they have, what motivations? So honestly, there's nothing wrong with vulnerability.
But to be honest, having established that getting vulnerable isn't a bad thing, I feel like that's completely a moot point because I don't actually think we're getting super duper vulnerable at all??? We're literally only reflecting, and therefore passing on our experiences. Sure, we're telling them how we felt at certain points of the journey and telling them we value our friends, but we're not exactly exposing the worst sides of ourselves or sharing any great secrets or telling of an emotional trauma. We're literally just telling a story, like you would tell someone what your high school experiences are like, and add things like talking about your disappointment when you didn't get the grade you wanted, or how you got inspired to work harder, or the life lessons you learned while there, because otherwise it's just a bland recount of "I went to english class and then I went to math class and then I went home." The things you tell would be all personal things, yes, but this is not "whoa too much information why are you telling this to a stranger" territory, at all. And it's honestly how a story should be told? The best way to tell an engaging story is by making it personal and involved. There's no reason to really care if there's no emotion behind a story--then it just becomes a news recount.
I'm not saying that telling it dramatic is a bad option, or that it would be a lifeless story if told that way (though I kinda worry about how impressed they'd be since as Siani's disciples, I'm sure they've done a lot. But it'll be entertaining no matter their reactions are, so I'm fine with it). But I also don't think it's true that "hey telling this story reflectively is too personal, this will freak people out," because I honestly don't think reflecting on your experiences and telling them to an audience is something to be avoided.
In the end, I'm fine with either winning out, but I hope that people don't dismiss the "reflectively" option for the reason of it being "too personal for strangers." I see the "reflectively" option as going over the parts that mattered to us, and showcasing what Kong Zhi is really like--a person who thinks a lot and values his friends and is earnest in expressing who he is. That's the recount I want to read about.
TL;DR: It's basically like bookofportals said, telling a story while relating what you thought and felt is a perfectly normal thing to do, and it's what makes a story actually good!
Sorry for the long rant. I'm usually just a lurker who votes and leaves, but I honestly do not agree with the assessment that "reflectively" was given. All of this just got typed up in a fit of passion ¯\_(ツ)_/¯