Converse: Verb:
1. Carry on a conversation
Converse: Noun:
1. A proposition obtained by conversion
Converse: Adjective:
1. Of words so related that one reverses the relation denoted by the other
2. Turned about in order or relation
[WordWeb.info]
The proposed system, Rethink Perfect, redefines what is thought to be ‘normal’ conversation by encouraging clarification of the agreements by which conversation is typically conducted.
Conversations are typically entered into with an undefined set of tacit (unspoken) agreements. These unspoken and thus not fully conscious ‘agreements’ are often at odds with each other between conversational partners. This often leads to misunderstandings, argument, and failed communication.
The author, Mr. Desmond Sherlock, proposes a ‘converse’ approach. That is to say, a reverse approach to conversational interaction. Rather than rely on tacit agreements of conversation, one begins conversations explicitly stating the ‘rules of engagement. Although this may appear a daunting task to most, Mr. Sherlock suggests that it is not as daunting as it may initially appear.
At the heart of this new approach to ‘conversing’ is the idea that one reverses the communication offered by another by applying a set of converting tools. These are labelled the 6 A. Accountable, Adjustable, Acceptable and Acknowledge Appreciate Apologize.
Mr. Sherlock suggests that the use of a formula mix of these 6 tools will resolve problems of communication. He offers a set of key phrases that need be inserted into communications for the communications to be successful in avoiding ‘clashes’ of personalities. Mr. Sherlock is currently taking his e-book and theories out for field testing.
Critique of the book has been suspended, due to clashes with an unruly student foolishly attempting it. However, discussions are still open for those who agree to follow the explicit agreements required and follow the proposed rules. This is a must for if the rules are not followed communications break down.
rethink PERFECT 
This is a pretty accurate summary from Luis, of what I am trying to achieve. However I am not the gate keeper of the “rules” of engagement. I am suggesting that in order to have a relationship, where I feels comfortable to take it out on the “freeway” of explicit conversation, I would need more than just implied agreements or more commonly known as “manners” or politeness.
I have found, through much testing already, that failing to get agreements on the use of Adjustable and Accountable language for example, we are going to eventually crash on this freeway and have no means to recover. Achieving an agreement on these 6A’s for treating each other, I believe, is likely to allow crashes to occur and be able to repair the minimal damage that may occur at such speeds.
The main objective of getting such agreements to these “rules of engagement” is not to avoid conflict or crashes but allow us to recover unscathed when we travel at such break-neck speeds,
and inevitably come unstuck. Ready to move forward and test out the next highway of conversation.