Decision not discussion

Ok, pangloss suggested that I mention this her, so here goes.
How about setting a particular topic to discuss. Then, members of ilp act like an international jury/court/organisation or whatever, (seeing as ilp is international), then everyone tries to come to a particular agreement on what would be the best solution. It may not work with distinctively philosophical questions but could work with topics regarding the politics and economics. For example, as suggested, drawing up animal rights would be a good first one to put on trial. One main problem could be that of more peole adding to the discussion thus making it virtually impossible to come toa consensus. This could be solved by leaving a period, say a week, for people to register onto the discussion. Thay are then free to partake in the discussion and when everyone thinks they have come up with a common solution, they vote, (hopefully all in approval.) A time period would have to be left for all people to vote naturally.

We could always just run a trial, find the problems, solve them, and try again on a different discussion. If it doesn’t wor5k then there is no harm done. Any suggestions?

I laways find that these things tend to get pushed to two extrmes (see the Iraq yes or no updated for example). However it might work and sounds like an interesting idea. Might also give some closure to a thread as sometimes they just seem to peter out after an initially exchange of views.