I think all of the Gricean Maxims are important to this presentation but there are a few we should focus on. For on I think that the maxim of quality is very important to this. Since we are presenting about a topic that can cause some controversy we should focus on what we personally believe is true and fact. Anything that is somewhat false or lacks evidence should not be brought up. For this we need to be sure that if someone says something that isn’t true we need to steer the conversation away from what they said so that we can focus on real information. We also want to make sure that we keep the presentation on topic. It can be a topic that sparks some controversy but we need to make sure it focuses on what we are discussing, free vs hate speech.
Another thing that we should focus on is keeping the crowd interested during our deliberation. The more that the crowd is interested in, the more that people will want to talk about it. The more that people get involved, it will be much easier to talk to them and enjoy what we are doing. We can try to play to the crowd and make sure they are having fun. We should also try to focus on making sure to get different people in the crowd involved. If we can ask different people questions throughout our presentation, more views on the argument will be brought up therefore giving us more to prompt the audience about. Lastly we should focus on giving an interesting outlook on our argument. If we do something different that other people will be more inclined to talk. Also, if it is more interesting more people will retain information from it. If we follow these steps our public deliberation will go well.
https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/dravling/grice.html
I think you captured the essence of how we should act during the deliberation. Speaking in a manner to get everyone involved is crucial. Our last reading on facilitation will greatly help with that. I hope that we can encourage every team member to study it prior to the deliberation. I also how you deemed quality the most important. There is no point to our deliberation if we cannot steer people away from points that do not contribute. We want everyone to leave feeling like they fully expressed what they believe. In order to do this, we must be excellent facilitators, which I see no trouble doing.
I like your view on facilitation: the only way that this will be successful is if we generate an atmosphere that makes the people present want to actively participate. We could have done all the research in the world, and it wouldn’t matter if we cannot create an environment conducive to conversation. I also like the idea of focusing on truth, but with speech, opinions are the main determinant of thought. Based on that, I think we should be careful as ruling something as inherently false lest we inadvertently close off a certain point of view.
Add an intro and a hook, to many I think statements, just talk about it. Audience is needed.