One of the charming aspects of VC culture was that shortly after Orin invented a drinking game (see 4:38 p.m. post on Nov. 23) based on how often commenter J. Aldridge mentioned John Bingham, readers wanted clarification on the rules. In particular, the rules say that one must take “a drink” whenever J. Aldridge mentions Bingham; but what constitutes “a drink”?
Since it’s Orin’s game, he has the final say, but pending any dispositive pronouncement from him, let us consult precedent. “Aldridge’s Bingham” is plainly a descendant of “Hi Bob,” in which a person watches The Bob Newhart Show, and takes a drink whenever anyone says “Hi Bob.” The Webtender handbook chapter on Drinking Games specifies that “a drink” in “Hi Bob” means that the person must take “a very generous drink of their beer.”
The Webtender rulebook is useful but is not controlling precedent. First of all, the “Hi Bob” parallel rule that when the prompt occurs, everyone must say “Hi Bob!” is plainly inapplicable. All the more so since J. Aldridge’s first name is unknown.
Further, “Hi Bob” is premised on a half-hour television show, in which the number of instances of characters saying “Hi Bob” will likely be less than three dozen. In contrast, “Aldridge’s Bingham” contains no such upper limit, is already well over three dozen, and could eventually reach three digits.
Accordingly, the provisional rules for Aldridge’s Bingham are as follows: 1 unit = a 12 oz. beer, or 4 oz. of wine, or one shot of distilled spirits. Upon reading the prompt (that is, Aldridge writing “Bingham”) immediately consume 1/5 of one unit. In other words, a “drink” for purposes of Aldridge’s Bingham is 1/5 of one alcohol unit.
A short FAQ:
Q. What about a comment in which Bingham is mentioned more than once? For example, Aldridge quotes a previous comment about Bingham, and then himself writes about Bingham?
A. In such a case, you would be required to have two drinks. Anything written by Aldridge, include a quotation from a previous comment, counts.
Q. What about another commenter who quotes Aldridge discussing Bingham?
A. No drink required. The game is “Aldridge’s Bingham,” not “Anyone’s Bingham.”
Q. What about that huge comment with a half-dozen Bingham quotes?
A. You must immediately consume the corresponding number of drinks.
Q. I already saw that big quote on a previous thread, and now I see it again. Do I have to have another half-dozen drinks?
A. Yes. Rules are rules. When you start reading a thread, you are responsible for the game-related consequences. The possibility of encountering the mega-quote is similar to a game of “Hi Bob,” in which five characters might say “Hi Bob” all at once. This adds excitement and diversity to game play.
Q. I have been playing diligently. I read every thread today, and drank all that I was supposed to. Yet I barely feel tipsy.
A. Stephen Green, we are pleased that you are a reader of the VC.
wolfefan says:
DK wins his own thread!
Quote
November 23, 2009, 11:13 pmMark Field says:
Missing from this analyis is what John Bingham himself said about this issue:
“The Constitution was never understood to protect the right to engage in drinking games. The Amendment does not add any new rights, but only protects those privileges and immunities previously enjoyed.”
The Supreme Court famously adopted this view in the Roadhouse Cases.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 11:33 pmVincenti Winchester says:
This reminds me of an evening I was hunkered down with a group of Russians in St. Petersburg.
These guys have a saying after a night of drinking. The first thing they say in Russian when greeting their drinking friends the next morning is, “Do you still respect me?”
That’s whether they did anything or not. The idea is that so many memories are lost that such a greeting is just made regardless.
However, back to the evening. We started by toasting each other. That was six shots of vodka right there. And then for good luck we had to toast each corner of the room. That’s four more. Then the ceiling and floor separately. And, finally one for Mother Russia.
To say that we were all wasted was an understatement. The snow and cold didn’t seem so bad though after that.
The next morning, in English, I said to my host, “Do you still respect me?”
No wonder the Russian male has a life expectancy of approximately 60 years.
Quote
November 23, 2009, 11:42 pmLeo Marvin says:
How about “Hi Sam!” (for Samuel Freeman Miller)?
Quote
November 23, 2009, 11:49 pmChrisTS says:
Ok (not to be confused with Prof. OK), here are some other issues:
Suppose one has not been keeping up (one was asleep, at work, some other reasonable excuse for not being on VC 24/7)for some number of hours [to be specified] and comes on a comment thread to which JA has made multiple posts. Must one now ‘catch up’ in number of drinks* to the point of JA’s last comment?
Do commenters who do ‘Find’ searches for “J. Aldridge” and avoid the threads get a free pass?
*I note that there is STILL no specification of ‘a drink.’
Jeesh. You law professors are pretty sloppy. :-)
Quote
November 24, 2009, 12:02 amDave Hardy says:
But John Bingham might have meant something other than an ounce of ethanol. He might have meant a big swig of water. And the silence of the 39th Congress proves that they were all teetotalers who thought his statement embarrassing. Jacob Howard’s, too. In short anyone who knew anything and said anything knew less than I do, because they didn’t agree with me. So take that!
Quote
November 24, 2009, 12:25 amAlice says:
I think Dave Kopel defined “drink” here:
Quote
November 24, 2009, 1:09 amgwinje says:
Can I use all the drinking I do when I’m not on Bingham watch as some sort of beer offset?
Quote
November 24, 2009, 2:49 amKharn says:
The Conspiracy won’t be in the top legal blogs next month cause we’ll all be dead...
Quote
November 24, 2009, 7:33 amShelbyC says:
What if J. Aldridge accidently double-posts?
Quote
November 24, 2009, 11:49 amNickM says:
David, have you ever tried to drink 1/5 of a shot?
Nick
Quote
November 24, 2009, 12:08 pmJohn Jenkins says:
@NickM: 1/5 of a unit is the minimum required amount. Feel free to drink more.
Quote
November 24, 2009, 12:24 pmGrinch fan (only the original) says:
My favorite “Hi, Bob” variant is to watch the Grinch Chirstmas special (the original cartoon, not the awful movie) and drink for everytime someone says “who.” As in, “all the Whos down in Whoville sang their Who songs,” and “Who? Cindy Lou Who, that’s Who!” Recommended only for strong drinkers in peak condition (i.e., college students).
Quote
November 24, 2009, 12:41 pmgreg says:
Probably, but it was likely always in the company of four other 1/5 of a shots (1/5s of a shot?)
Quote
November 24, 2009, 12:41 pmTomB says:
Like all drinking games, local rules can trump the standard rules. Maybe those pansies at Harvard consider a double post to count as only one drink, but at GW, we drink three times: once for each mention and once for Aldridge’s sloppiness. And typically, the host of an event can choose not to follow the local rules.
Quote
November 24, 2009, 1:31 pmGuesty Guest Guest says:
I’m struggling to remember the commenter who kept trying to bet others and using the word “schmuck.” Anyone know who I’m talking about?
Quote
November 24, 2009, 1:49 pmThales says:
As a sometime foil of J. Aldridge and his Bingham (helpful analogy: Aldridge is to Aldridge’s Bingham as Dr. Frankenstein is to Frankenstein’s monster), I’m so disappointed that I missed the opportunity to weigh in at an earlier time, and to get rip-roaring drunk in reading the thread in response to Orin’s original proposal.
Quote
November 24, 2009, 2:40 pmChrisTS says:
Alice: Thanks. It was 12:02, and I had been playing for too long. :-)
Quote
November 24, 2009, 3:27 pmLib says:
Is it just me, or does it seem that DK may be letting his gaze wander slightly off the ball in the warm afterglow of Heller? File an amicus brief here or there, read a thread [hoping J. Aldridge shows up], write another brief, read a thread [hoping desperately that J. Aldridge shows up], publish a book, read a thread [after using his privileges to post a fake J. Aldridge:Bingham post], drink [finally!], reread last thread, drink, reread last thread, drink [“honest, I made a mistake and clicked the same link again, but we must follow the rules — a society without rules is an anarchy”], rinse and repeat [only last step or two — that writing thing is way overrated].
Quote
November 24, 2009, 4:05 pmreadery says:
Do legal academics actually work for a living?
Quote
November 24, 2009, 8:41 pmJC says:
Vincenti, I’m not sure I get it. What happened after you said that?
Quote
November 26, 2009, 11:39 amRachael Mathews says:
Thanks for expanding on this topic. I have been searching via yahoo for the past couple hours. I have read some of your other posts and they are great. I will be awaiting your next post.
Quote
November 30, 2009, 7:42 pmMyrtle Beach Attorney says:
If you would like to find information about Colorado Springs Real Estate, visit the Real Estate Book, the web
Quote
December 2, 2009, 7:21 pm