I think Paul's idea, where the ATM proponent needs to first establish that they understand the mainstream explanation that they propose requires an ATM replacement, is one of the most sensible ideas regarding a change to any ATM rules that I've heard before.

Besides making their argument a lot clearer, it also would be a great way to correct the misconceptions that seem to usually be the basis of the ATM ideas in the first place. That way the OP would learn a lot more, along with everbody else participating or lurking, and it seems to me that this is the greatest benefit of the ATM (and CT) sections.

__________________
Minuteman: You have now been warned!
01101001: I beg to differ. I have been amused. Not warned.