One of many many examples of the organic process of rules writing at Summit VI:
The subject was TDA Rule 34 Action in Turn (from the 2011 Rules, Version 2.0), specifically "chips in turn must stay in the pot". The specific question was what guidelines might a TD use in determining whether to require the under-caller to make a full call or allow them to leave the under-call in and fold.
On Day 1, initial suggestions from Jack Effel, Matt Savage, and Dave Lamb started the discussion. All 3 suggested they would almost always rule a silent under-call (chips pushed out without a declaration) a full call when there were two players remaining in the hand. Note that in this situation the under-caller would always be responding to "the first bettor" in the round. Kathy Raymond, Poker Operations Director at the Venetian then spoke up, pointing out that she would consider an under-call to the first bet multi-way to be a full call. Sam Quinto of the Commerce LA then put both situations into one compact phrase, nothing that both are "undercalls to the opening bet of any round".
In a different situation, Tommy LaRosa, the Venetian TD suggested that one factor he uses is whether there have been two bets to the player. For example, blinds are 1000-2000, and post flop the first to act opens for 2000, the next bettor quietly declares all-in for 28,000, and an under-caller then tosses out 2000 silently. In this case, Tommy would weigh whether it was an honest mistake or whether the player should have seen the bet or worse if he thinks the undercaller is taking a shot.
Another condition that might require a full call ruling was if the under-call prompted the next player in turn to take action. One attendee raised the sticky question of how might you rule, however, if the subsequent action itself was an undercall? There was significant further debate on the topic and it was agreed by all to table the discussion until Day 2.
Overnight, a new powerpoint slide was produced with the following proposed language:
34: Verbal Declarations / Acting in Turn / Undercalls: Players must act in turn. Verbal betting declarations in turn are binding. Chips placed in the pot in turn stay in the pot.
A: Multi-way or heads-up, an undercall is a call if made facing an opening bet or if action has occurred behind it;
B: Multi-way, if two or more bets precede the undercall, TD’s discretion applies.
C: Players should wait for clear bet amounts before acting. Ex: A says “raise” (but states no amount), and B and C quickly fold; B & C should wait to act until A’s exact raise amount is clear.
On the morning before the start of Day 2, several attendees huddled with Neil Johnson of the EPT to discuss this slide. Out of that pre-meeting came further suggested changes which were brought up in debate on the topic on Day 2. The full membership eventually voted in section A, but dropped the "action has occurred behind it", leaving those situations to TD judgement. Section B was changed to "All other situations, TD's discretion applies". C was left intact.
A was subsequently amended to: A: An undercall is a mandatory full call if made facing an opening bet multi-way on any betting round, or facing any bet heads up.. To more accurately indicate that undercalling any bet heads up, not just the opening bet, should be ruled a full binding call.
If it were not for the input of over 160 attendees who took the time to "sleep on the proposal" and consider it over two days, we would not have this true advancement on the undercall issue.
ADD to this a new rule "Calls", which sets forth acceptable and standard forms of calling and among other things addresses deliberate undercalling... responding to a relatively large bet with a relatively tiny silent chip (example: A checks, B pushes all-in for 50k and C tosses out a single 1000 silently)...
Huge progress was made on these and numerous other major issues because of the free-flowing organic nature of the TDA Summit. Many thanks to all who attended!