Arguments for "No"

The arguments in favor of a "No" resolution generally fell into three categories: language precision, lack of press consensus, and market expectations.

Language Precision

Mr.ozi noted that Ukrainian sources used the word костюм, which broadly refers to any coordinated outfit and does not exclusively mean "suit" in the Western sense.

Lack of Press Consensus

Aenews acknowledged The New York Times' language but argued that one outlet does not establish consensus.

BLONK added that if there truly were consensus, it would have been reflected across multiple major news outlets.

OKAYWAY1 specified that no new material evidence emerged since the last vote. Additionally, he emphasized the importance of UMA independently coming up with a good consensus resolution.

Market Expectations

Fhantom - hideki.eth argued that the market clearly intended to capture a return to traditional Western businesswear, not stylistic variants or edge cases.

Puddinpop's argument focused on the idea that a "reasonable person" would interpret "suit" to mean Zelenskyy’s prewar business attire.

Domer cited Zelenskyy’s own public statement that he would not wear a suit until the war was over, suggesting the outfit was deliberately non-qualifying.

Domer rejected the Mao suit framing, stating it doesn’t meet the intended market standard.

JessicaOnlyChild argued that even the market order book reflected this expectation, showing that most traders anticipated a return to conventional tailoring rather than alternative interpretations.

Coming Up

With both sides presented, we’ll now turn to a closer look at several arguments made in bad faith in the next chapter.