Do you think it is possible to make Krishnamurti more "practicable" than what he himself seems to have allowed for?

No. It is not possible to make the teaching 'more practicable' without compromising the truth of the teaching.
It is not about being popular and reaching everyone - there are plenty of gurus and religions who accommodate for that. K went where none of the others went. The teaching is, as he said, not for everyone. To go into the teaching of K deeply, there is a ground that must be laid.

The teaching is not about 'practice'. Does one 'practice' living?

Are there any aspects of Krishnamurti's teaching that you find implausible or difficult to accept?

Not really. The teaching underwent its own evolution throughout K's life, as he discovered the loopholes for thought (as the self) to find security in what he said, or in the manner in which he expressed the teaching. By the end of K's life the teaching was at its most austere, and at its most clear.
It is important to embrace the wholeness of the teaching, along with an awareness of K's life journey, which clarifies any perceived inconsistencies if one is prepared to do the work.

Do you think it advisable to introduce Krishnamurti to people you know? Have you ever done it and if yes, what are your experiences?

I don't make any effort to introduce Krishnamurti to people I know. If it is appropriate, that is very clearly evident, and the subject will arise naturally - spontaneously.

If you had to sum up what Krishnamurti is all about in just a few words of your own, what would they be?

Negation - through understanding - of the disorder of humanity - which we all share, and for which we are all responsible.

How important do you consider group dialogue to be in understanding the more subtle points of Krishnamurti's message?

I have a problem with the word 'dialogue', but my answer would be - not very important at all - at least not really in situations such as forums like this, which is mostly superficial. But then, it is a chance to put oneself on the line, be challenged, and required to clarify what one is saying. But essentially - K did it alone, and so that is possible.
My experience with so-called 'dialogues' is that they never get very far, and can too easily become a contest in 'the race for enlightenment', which is a joke. For me the teaching is not about 'enlightenment' at all, which is nothing more than a desired result, but it is about discovery and responsibility for the whole.

Do you think Krishnamurti was exceptional, or is the transformation he spoke of universally accessible?

K was an ordinary human being, but he had laid the ground - with pure vegetarian diet, uncluttered thinking process, gentle inquiring nature. The questions he asked were extraordinary, and the discoveries that manifested from those questions are available to anyone who has laid the ground to find out for themselves - without compromise.

How do you personally go about exploring the Krishnamurti's teachings (through personal study, dialogues, dvds)?

In everyday life - watching and alone. In discussions with a partner who shares the passion of the inquiry. And through personal study, as we have an extensive library of the whole teaching - which I did read constantly for a number of years, but now consult only occasionally.

Does the phrase "living the teachings" have any meaning to you?

Yes. Otherwise what the teaching points towards remains a theory.

What future do you foresee for Krishnamurti's works? Do you think they will grow in importance or will they just gradually die away?

They may fade if they are watered down to make them more palatable. They may merge into all other 'guru promisings', and that would be tragic.

But as long as the K organizations maintain access to the teaching in all its purity, there will always be the few with the passion to find out.

Krishnamurti once said you must begin with doubt, but that doubt must be kept on a leash. How do you find the proper balance between doubt and a "positive disposition" in investigating his proposals, so as to neither tie yourself up in knots, nor to blindly believe?

Doubt - like thought - has a place.

Can dialogue - in the sense of sincere inquiry - be organized or can it only come about spontaneously, unprompted?

Organized dialogue risks 'becoming' a ritual.

Spontaneity is natural inquiry, and natural inquiry is spontaneous.

Has coming into contact with Krishnamurti and his teachings had any perceptible effect on your life and/or relationships?

Immeasurably.

Do you ever feel that you have been conditioned by Krishnamurti's teachings?

The teaching is about undoing conditioning.

How can that possibly condition, as the whole movement of conditioning is seen?