A very worthwhile experiment!
Some ideas for guidelines:
There is the risk that squabbling over the application of the guidelines will again make the discussion unproductive. One way of limiting such dispute might be to state not only what is not allowed, but also what is explicitly allowed.
Only *explicitly* offensive statements should be disallowed. Many people will perceive statements (e.g., that Ehud Olmert is a great leader, or that Hassan Nasrallah is a great leader, or that they are morally equivalent) as offensive, but a successful dialogue would be characterized precisely by everyone understanding how the others arrived at views that at first appear offensive to them, so such statements need to be allowed. Very well-meaning people can interpret the world very differently and can come to very different judgements. A contribution should be considered offensive only if it cannot be interpreted as an attempt to add information or a viewpoint to the discussion. |
|
