I strongly believe that phrases like "poorly worded motions" are themselves misleading. Every motion that I have seen during my 15 or so months on TalkBoard has been very carefully crafted, after intense public and private discussion. Nevertheless, a few have been less than perfect, with subtle flaws becoming apparent after the motion was made and announced, and more people started reading it. I suppose that the proposer might have discovered the flaws if he or she had studied it intensely enough for a long enough time. Maybe so; maybe not. But we cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the good. (Thank you, Voltaire!) We move ahead when we believe that we are ready. If we find subtle flaws, then we (or the people higher up the food chain) can, should and really must fix them. That can happen many different ways. One such way is a practical friendly amendment process, which I totally support.

Bruce