Calling people IN rather than calling people OUT, is key for sensitive topics; where language is changing rapidly, mistakes are inevitable. Ground rules need to support and normalise three key things: (1) asking for more clarification before responding, (2) owning the impact of your words no matter the intent and (3) acknowledging that no sensitive topic is friction-free. Sensitive topics have power imbalances. Conversations between perspectives/people that don’t share equal power inherently have friction. The discussion doesn’t cause comms to breakdown - our egos do that. High friction needs: low ego, high clarity, and sky high mutual respect.

En mi experiencia, se debe establecer expectativas claras al comienzo de la sesión. Esto incluye definir cuándo y cómo los participantes pueden intervenir, utilizando funciones como la mano levantada en plataformas virtuales o asignar turnos específicos para hablar. También fomento el uso del chat como una vía alternativa para que aquellos que prefieren escribir puedan compartir sus ideas sin interrumpir el flujo verbal.

A good way is to turn your next comment into a question and ask virtually participants sit out responses into chat … for example I ask what one thing are you grateful for today ? Take 10 seconds and put into chat … this interactions motivates silent people to jump in and as you facilitate by reading aloud some of the replies with true persons name it validates participants

It is vital that the space be 'held' for any messiness to unfold. As well as a solid facilitator, ground rules help a great deal here. Preframing 'breakdowns' as part of the process toward understanding is really helpful, as it reduces the frustration that comes from not being understood/heard. After that, it's about tuning into the feelings and using them to explore what is unfolding... "If you were to follow that feeling back, what memories come to mind?" This expands the thread, so that the group can feel into where each other is coming from.