Comments on: Rules for Aldridge’s Bingham

By: downlad free full games

downlad free full games — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:26:14 +0000

I would like to say thanks for putting up this site. I’m just getting in to this will give me a kickstart.

By: Myrtle Beach Attorney

Myrtle Beach Attorney — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 00:21:40 +0000

If you would like to find information about Colorado Springs Real Estate, visit the Real Estate Book, the web

By: Rachael Mathews

Rachael Mathews — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:42:51 +0000

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.

By: JC

JC — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:39:52 +0000

Vincenti, I’m not sure I get it. What happened after you said that?

By: readery

readery — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 01:41:42 +0000

Do legal academics actually work for a living?

By: Lib

Lib — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:05:13 +0000

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].

By: ChrisTS

ChrisTS — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:27:43 +0000

Alice: Thanks. It was 12:02, and I had been playing for too long. :-)

By: Thales

Thales — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:40:28 +0000

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.

By: Guesty Guest Guest

Guesty Guest Guest — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:49:05 +0000

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?

By: TomB

TomB — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:31:06 +0000

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.

By: greg

greg — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:41:58 +0000

NickM: David, have you ever tried to drink 1/5 of a shot? Nick

Probably, but it was likely always in the company of four other 1/5 of a shots (1/5s of a shot?)

By: Grinch fan (only the original)

Grinch fan (only the original) — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:41:49 +0000

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).

By: John Jenkins

John Jenkins — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:24:32 +0000

@NickM: 1/5 of a unit is the minimum required amount. Feel free to drink more.

By: NickM

NickM — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:08:34 +0000

David, have you ever tried to drink 1/5 of a shot?

Nick

By: ShelbyC

ShelbyC — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:49:50 +0000

What if J. Aldridge accidently double-posts?

By: Kharn

Kharn — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:33:04 +0000

The Conspiracy won’t be in the top legal blogs next month cause we’ll all be dead…

By: gwinje

gwinje — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 07:49:55 +0000

Can I use all the drinking I do when I’m not on Bingham watch as some sort of beer offset?

By: Alice

Alice — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 06:09:22 +0000

ChrisTS: *I note that there is STILL no specification of ‘a drink.’

I think Dave Kopel defined "drink" here:

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.

By: Dave Hardy

Dave Hardy — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:25:28 +0000

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!

By: ChrisTS

ChrisTS — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:02:32 +0000

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. :-)

By: Leo Marvin

Leo Marvin — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 04:49:13 +0000

First of all, the “Hi Bob” parallel rule that when the prompt occurs, everyone must say “Hi Bob!” is plainly inapplicable.

How about “Hi Sam!” (for Samuel Freeman Miller)?

By: Vincenti Winchester

Vincenti Winchester — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 04:42:55 +0000

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.

By: Mark Field

Mark Field — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 04:33:39 +0000

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.

By: wolfefan

wolfefan — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 04:13:17 +0000

DK wins his own thread!