I have read through them quite a few times, and I have found them to be an overly comprehensive treatment of the subjects in question—the fullness of Christ’s humanity is dealt with, the unconfused nature of the union between His divinity and humanity are dealt with, the natural energy and will proper to each nature is dealt with, issues of terminology are dealt with—as far as I am concerned they have left nothing out and been quite unequivocal about everything.
Indeed, I've always got the impression from the dialogues that "the debate is over". Now, it's more along the lines of how we can spread these conclusions to others who either have no idea or are reluctant to understand them, and how we can intermingle with one another to learn from one another's histories, traditions, and cultures.
Other dialogues between individual churches are just there to reaffirm what has already been agree in the four unofficial and four official councils.
I've emailed Fr. Thomas Fitzgerald about the 8 dialogues, how it can be made readily available, with all the papers and minutes. He mentioned that he is soon to publish them all in one new book. I don't know how "soon" is soon, but I hope it's sometime before we all die. :-P
Also, I've noticed how this thread has been dragging on. I've personally questioned whether it is really truly not understanding clearly the other position, or whether something is so clear that one is too reluctant to accept clarity and look for holes.
Whenever there's a discussion like this, I always wonder or look for what "exactly" is the issue. Where is the problem? Pinpoint it for me so that I may be able to have a much better discussion than just reiterating what has already been discussed.
I suggest that this should occur rather than wasting much typing for something already (or what seems to me) written.