This site is my favorite example on the web as a discussion place that nurtures a conversation that creates new thoughts. From a technical point of view, intense debate seems like great tech. The harder problem is the human factor. This site has a clear agenda. It attracts people who share that agenda. As far as I can see, it's purpose was not to attract a gezillion users. It's purpose is to be a place for collaborative thinking.

A newspaper might host a discussion on local economic development. Make sure that at least two pros were incented to participate. They would set the tone. No need to moderate comments. The norms of communication would quickly and naturally evolve. My take is that the most appropriate mind set for a newspaper company is to have a teacher-type manage the discussion. Teacher in the sense of team leader – not in the sense of "talk and chalk."

The skills and attitudes needed to nurture a good on line discussion are exactly those of the great teacher. The culture shift is that journalism has rarely lived up to the "inform, educate" part. For very good commercial reasons, it's about "amuse" or amaze.

And of course, my plug for Print. Consider the effects on the conversation, if everyone knew coming in that edited comments, with or without names (user's choice) would be published once a week in an "Discusssions on the web" section of the paper.