nah, a rejection of (concentional) morality would, in itself, be a moral structure. what he seems to be getting at it complete amorality, making the relativistic sliding scale of moral/immoral redundant. but its fine, because you've divorced yourself from personal responsibility through the dice.
Divorcing yourself from moral obligation by claiming 'the dice made me do it' doesn't actually remove actual moral obligations. It sounds like you're swallowing the menu.
whose menu? it seems like the aim of "the dicelife" is the destruction of the personality, certainly this is the aim explicitly stated by the protagonist of the first book, personal responsibility is only possible in as much as the "personality" is relatively unchanged. by making the personality of the individual as "random" as possible, the relativistic nature of morality is forefronted, no?
Ok, I can dig that interpretation. Eating the menu refers to taking things too literally, without being discerning of subtleties and underlying messages.
