Names and hopes

• Participants are welcomed and the facilitator will ask everyone to say their names and answer the question:
  • What are you hoping to get out of today’s event?

The ground rules

• Give each other a greater benefit of the doubt than usual.
• Try to not only listen: try to understand each other.
• Participants should make a real effort to be persuasive, to make sense, and to take responsibility over their claims of fact.
• Participants should be open to being fact-checked and to the possibility of learning something.
• Participants should focus on the issue being argued and make an effort to engage with the argument being given. Points critiquing the premise of the argument should be short and to the point. Participants should not repeat their critiques of the premise of an argument.

The facilitator may decide that the group would benefit from exercises to help encourage individuals to speak more freely before moving on to the next step.

Special Roles

• Participants with special roles are pointed out: Facilitator, Note Taker, Advocate, etc.
• Participants may take on certain roles if unfilled (Note Taker, Time Keeper, Fact Checker, and Rule Keeper)

The format

• The Argument Game format is presented.
• Participants may ask questions about the format.

Off-Topic Token

• The mechanics of the Off-Topic Token are presented..

If there is an Advocate of and Challenger to a proposal:

• Move on to Step 5. PATH A

If there is an Advocate of a proposal, but no challenger:

• Up to 5 minutes may be spent to find a Challenger.
• The proposal is read. The group is asked if anyone will argue against the proposal and fill the role of Challenger.
• Participants may ask for clarifications about the proposal at this time.
• If no one agrees to be a Challenger after 5 minutes:
  • Move on to Step 5. PATH B

If there is no Advocate of a proposal:

• Up to 10 minutes may be spent to find both an Advocate and a Challenger.
• Potential proposals are suggested to the group.
• The group is asked if anyone will fill the role of Advocate and argue in favor of a particular proposal—whether in whole, in part, modified in some way, or for an entirely different proposal.
• If a participant wants to advocate for a proposal, they will clarify what they are arguing for.
• Participants may ask for further clarifications about the proposal at this time.
• If after 10 minutes, no one has agreed to be an Advocate:
  • Move on to Move on to Step 5. PATH C
• If an Advocate for a proposal emerges, then the group is asked if anyone will argue against the proposal and fill the role of Challenger.
• The Challenger is required to repeat the proposal.
• If after 10 minutes, there is an Advocate, but no Challenger:
  • Move on to Move on to Step 5. PATH B

Advocate’s argument in favor of proposal

• Proposal is repeated.
• Advocate has 5 minutes to argue for their proposal.

Questions and comments about the proposal

• Participants may share questions and comments about the proposal. (1 minute each).
• Advocate has 3 minutes to answer. They can choose which questions to answer.

Challenger’s question requiring a response

• Challenger may ask a question requiring a response from the Advocate before making their argument (1 minute).
• Advocate has 2 minutes to answer.

Challenger’s argument in opposition to proposal

• Proposal is repeated.
• Challenger has 5 minutes to argue against the proposal.

Questions and comments about the opposition

• Participants may share questions and comments about the proposal. (1 minute each).
• Challenger has 3 minutes to answer. They can choose which questions to answer.

Advocate’s question requiring a response

• Advocate may ask a question requiring a response from the Challenger before their wrap-up argument (1 minute).
• Challenger has 2 minutes to answer.

Wrap-up arguments

• The Advocate and Challenger will each have 2 more minutes to wrap up their arguments however they like (e.g., tying loose ends, addressing unanswered questions, engaging in rhetoric, etc.).

Advocate’s argument in favor of proposal

• Proposal is repeated.
• Advocate has 5 minutes to argue for their proposal.
• Advocate has the option of drawing 5 minutes from their later response times to extend this initial argument time to 10 minutes.

Questions and comments about the proposal

• Participants may share questions and comments about the proposal. (1 minute each).
• Advocate has 4 minutes to answer. They can choose which questions to answer. This time is reduced to 2 minutes if they opted to extend their initial argument time.

Open discussion of proposal

• Participants are asked if they have any reactions to or additional questions about the proposal that they would like to share. (2 minutes each)
• Advocate has 5 minutes to respond to their choice of questions and reactions. This time is reduced to 2 minutes if they opted to extend their initial argument time.

One question requiring response

• Participants have 1 minute to choose someone to ask a question of the advocate requiring a direct response.
• The chosen participant has 1 minute to ask a question.
• Advocate has 2 minutes to answer.

Wrapping up argument

• Advocate has 4 more minutes to wrap up their argument however they like (e.g., tying loose ends, addressing unanswered questions, engaging in rhetoric, etc.).

If a topic hasn’t yet been established, the facilitator has discretion to use up to 3 minutes to decide on a topic.

Introduction of discussion topic

• Discussion topic is introduced.
• Each participant has 3 minutes to speak on the topic.

Questions and comments about fellow participants’ positions and opinions

• Participants may ask questions and make comments about each others’ positions and opinions on the topic. (1 minute each)
• Those who have been directly asked a question have 2 minutes to answer. They may clarify their positions without answering any question. They may also choose not to speak.

One question requiring a response

• Participants have 1 minute to choose someone to ask a question requiring a response.
• The chosen participant has 1 minute to ask a question.
• Participants may answer the question. (2 minutes each)
• If no participant has attempted to answer the question, the participant chosen to ask the question has 2 minutes to answer the question (or to opine on why the question was not answered).

• Note Taker reports on factual claims, unanswered questions, and requests for definitions.
• Participants may react to the Note Taker’s report. (1 minute each.)
• Before going on break, the Note Taker suggests factual claims (or questions about facts) that would be worth looking into.
• If there is a Fact Checker, they will choose which claims or questions to look into.
• If there is no Fact Checker, a final call for a Fact Checker is made before the group takes a break.

• The group takes a 20-minute break from the format.
• During this time, a Fact Checker may attempt to confirm (or refute) factual issues suggested by the Note Taker.
• If there is no Fact Checker, skip Step 8 and move on to Step 9

• After the break, if there is a Fact Checker, they report their findings on factual claims (and questions about facts).
• The Fact Checker reveals their sources.
• Participants may react to and question this report and the sources used to confirm (or refute) factual issues.

Participants’ final thoughts

• The Time Keeper may be asked to clarify who has spoken the least
• Participants have up to 3 minutes to share their final thoughts on the topic. Those who have spoken least go first.
• Participants may then ask each other questions about their positions and opinions on the topic. (1 minute to ask a question)
• Those who have been directly asked a question have 2 minutes to answer. They may clarify their positions without answering any question. They may also choose not to speak.

If there is an Advocate and a Challenger:

• Advocate and Challenger each have 2 minutes to share their final thoughts.

If there is an Advocate, but no Challenger:

• Advocate has 4 minutes to share their final thoughts.

Recognizing generosity, persuasion, and logic

• Note Taker may recognize any argument or exchange that stood out in their mind as generous, persuasive, or logical. (2 minutes)
• Participants have 1 minute to contribute to a discussion about the conversation that was just had. They may:
  • recognize a generous, persuasive, or logical argument or exchange.
  • point out opportunities for generosity, persuasion, or logic that were missed or undermined.
  • share tips for communicating with people across political divides.

Recognizing changed minds

• Participants may share if they have changed their mind about something, or if some particular point sparked their curiosity or left them with a doubt (however small). (1 minute each)

• If there is a Rule Keeper, they report on how closely the format was followed (e.g., were any steps skipped or changed?). They may share their views about whether changes were beneficial, detrimental, or neutral. (2 minutes)
• There will be three minutes maximum for feedback about the format.

Encouragement for continuing conversation

• Facilitator says:
  • “Conversations often benefit from being reconvened after everyone’s had time to reflect.”
• Participants who would like to share or receive future thoughts about the argument are encouraged to approach the Facilitator at the end to exchange contact information.
• Note Taker may use up to 3 minutes to call back to anything worth remembering or giving further thought.

Future arrangements

• Facilitator confirms the time and place of the next gathering.
• If there is already a topic, it will be announced.
• If a topic has not yet been confirmed, the Facilitator reminds participants to reach out if something comes to mind.