I think the idea of a forum is counterproductive. I get along on Wikipedia by not knowing that my colleagues are, like any normal swath of the population, often bigots of all sorts. Better to be silent and thought hateful than to speak and remove all doubt. The last thing we need is a forum to foment unrest and drama; enough of that is created during the course of actual editing.
I'm all for relaxing of the "not myspace" rules, because I think they often are excessive and silly. Wikipedia is a hobby, not a job (with respect to those who work for the Wikimedia Foundation), and I don't think I'm alone in not finding a "professional" atmosphere particularly enjoyable. Humans need to form communities and the way women are socialized makes us, in general, even more apt to form communities. But a forum or debate type environment does not foster community, or at least not the kind of community that we want.
Nepenthe
I agree. I often wonder what other editors are like in real life, particularly if butting heads is involved, but actually it doesn't matter. Someone editing, or engaging in administrative work, with an agenda is pretty much obvious, although people DO get away with stuff as it is not always practical to call attention to and resolve all such issues.
The community here, if one chooses to participate in it, is a community committed to creating a more or less accurate information resource which reflects diverse views with respect to information that is not well established. Those who feel that the views of their commercial, social, political, ethnic, or spiritual orientation should dominate or that other views should not be expressed are engaged in counter-productive behavior. This is somewhat balanced by countervailing efforts on the other side of almost any controversial matter. Hopefully some of these editors are eventually socialized into the larger project, although this is rather far-fetched with respect to those who are here to advance commercial interests. That aspect of our policies and practices can properly be discussed on our various talk pages, project pages and noticeboards.
Which is to say, community on Wikipedia is organized about the work we are doing. Which is not to say Wikipedia is not a hobby, or avocation, but even at a convention of hobbyists there is focused attention on relevant matters, which in our case is not content per se but adequate treatment of it.
Fred