What about this:
I propose that conversation is “A” learning process by which we
convert our own concepts, through other people’s
feedback, into FUTURE agreements. (and vice versa)
That the feedback we receive today may take up to 5, 10 or even 20 years to convert,
so the learning process might not be so obvious to some. Or for some, they refuse to
convert the feedback and fail to learn. In this case, where no conversion occurs, I would
be willing to say that no actual “conversation” or conversion took place. I am not sure what one would call such a transaction without any conversation? “Sad’ possibly.
“A” learning process, because there are many other types, ie reading, trial and error
pattern recognition and general experiments.
I have come to this conclusion by recognising the pattern that occurs after conversations.
ie I get new and improved ideas, and by some experiments and trial and error.
rethink PERFECT 
I guess that’s the thing – if people are conscious that their participation in a conversation could lead to both to learning, then I think they’d be more mindful of using constructive language. Ie the more constructive perhaps the greater chance of learning.
Conversely the more conditional the language is i.e. ultimatums – then perhaps the less constructive and less chance of conversion.
But I agree – it can be a long gestation process before our respective concepts convert to learning and hence the value of patience (I.e. the more patience perhaps the less likely the use of ultimatum type language 😦
But irregradless 😉 if ultimations are used or not ie not a perfect delivery,
Given the use of the Rethink Perfect moderators such as appreciation, it should all turn out good in the end. So I don’t think the focus shouldl be on the failures in the conversation, just the fact that we participated.
Anyway I had a few more conversations after writing this and it seems to have allowed me to convert my thoughts even further.
ie Maybe conversation is to try convert your thoughts into ours.