OP; in essence I love what you are aiming to achieve here. The problem is - and I have been giving this quite a bit of thought recently, with one thing and another - that personal discussion and real diplomacy can only occur between individuals that decide to see eye-to-eye and leave their prejudices at the door. Governments, organisations, groups, et-al, can do this because they have representatives that speak for those that they represent, and once consensus is achieved there are structures in place that allow that agreement to be discriminated to the rest of the population.
Such an action cannot and will never happen on the internet though because at its core the internet is the mob - the nameless, anonymous mass that is the human race. Sure, the mob is constructed of individuals but that does not make it the same thing in any way, shape, or form. Innately the mob is impersonal, a mass of unfocused opinion, reactive and entirely unrepresentative. It is the mishmash of all of the individuals that align themselves with whatever stance it is currently coalescing around, but beholden to none of those same people. And thus we have the quagmire that is #gamergate.
I have seen variations on the following kind of statement quite a lot recently; "I agree with the aggrievements categorised within #gamergate but your labelling of me (specifically me) as misogynist doesn't apply because I as an individual am not like that". The problem is that this is not and will never be a discussion between individuals. We are the tide. We are all spewing our thoughts onto public forums and comments threads with multitudes of other anonymous individuals all speaking to the abstracted 'you people' while simultaneously getting upset when others don't see us, ourselves, directly. In short, there is an innate contradiction here, one that I am not sure can ever really be bridged.
I guess the point I'm making is that although the sentiment of the OP is to be commended I do not think that the landscape of having this kind of debate here on the internet - between such large faceless numbers of people - can ever hope to come to any kind of constructive conclusion. It is also why I think discussion on the internet is so subject to being pulled off course by the most extreme voices within it - they inevitably colour the tone of the conversation more than any other, and in this specific case why all who align themselves with the #gamergate flag are coloured by the misogynist/abusive label even if it does not apply to them directly.
Increasingly I am of the opinion that this whole fiasco has largely come about and is further inflamed because there is no accountability on the internet and as such you can never ever have the kind of reasoned discussion we would all hope to see. It's just not what the internet is good at. There are just too many of us all speaking at once, and simultaneously all wanting to be heard. The best we can ever hope for is finding likeminded spirits that are able to speak clearly and directly to one and other and not allow the wave of public discourse to dominate that personal interaction.