Each person should speak about the things that affect them directly, including how they see their own situation, that of others, and the connections between the two. So they basically stick to presenting their own situation. The dialogue is initially just this, then. It is open. Talking and listening should happen in equal proportions, as far as this is possible.
People can also remain silent.
No one fires off questions like at an inquisition, no one interprets what the other person has said, no one insinuates that anyone has said anything they may not have said, no one forces anyone else to declare their position or to draw any particular conclusions, no one throws accusations at anyone. Whoever is speaking can finish what they are saying, they can also remain silent if they wish. We must let everyone have time to think about what they want to say. This arrangement is unusual. The fact that this is a serious attempt to enable solidarity to grow becomes clear to us once we understand that the reasons for accusations, attacks, interruptions, declarations of truth, insistence on being right etc, are an expression either of guilt feelings or feelings of victimization, both of which are, after all, reactions based on fear of real social processes.