[AntiGuv]

Well, the third version would be redundant. If we don't specify at all, then we are automatically disregarding whether the given features are otherwise inexplicable. I have no objection to your first modification - I think it would more precisely characterize Intelligent Design as it is ordinarily advocated - but I doubt that Alamo-Girl will agree to the modification.

Intelligent Design: A hypothesis wherein given features of life v non-life that are otherwise inexplicable are explained by an intelligent cause, rather than by an undirected process such as natural selection.*

What say you Alamo-Girl? Shall we accept this as our definition?

* Please note that I've changed "not by an undirected process" to "rather than by an undirected process" because it's more precise. If there's any objection to this, then now's the time!

[PatrickHenry]

Now I'm getting super-picky. Consider this:

Intelligent Design: A hypothesis wherein that given features of life v non-life that are otherwise inexplicable are explained by an intelligent cause, rather than by an undirected process such as natural selection.