Rules for Duels

January 5, 2016 7:11 AM

The Code of Honor; or Rules for the Government of Principals and Seconds in Duelling by John Lyde Wilson 1858. (via Chief Justice John Roberts)
posted by caddis (29 comments total)

(tl;dr: most disputes die and no-one shoots)
posted by saturday_morning at 7:14 AM on January 5, 2016 [23 favorites]

Or, if you prefer your duel rules in the form of a catchy song, might I recommend Hamilton?
posted by graventy at 7:24 AM on January 5, 2016 [8 favorites]

I feel like there's something terribly ironic about this, but... nah, nothing comes to mind.
posted by selfnoise at 7:24 AM on January 5, 2016

4. Never send a challenge in the first instance, for that precludes all negotiation. Let your note be in the language of a gentleman, and let the subject matter of complaint be truly and fairly set forth, cautiously avoiding attributing to the adverse party any improper motive.

This is good advice for responding to comments. Pony request: can we have a MetaDuel subsite, for when this advice breaks down?
posted by GenjiandProust at 7:30 AM on January 5, 2016 [8 favorites]

To the surprise and admiration of their fellows, two officers, like insane artists trying to gild refined gold or paint the lily, pursued a private contest through the years of universal carnage. They were officers of cavalry, and their connection with the high-spirited but fanciful animal which carries men into battle seems particularly appropriate. It would be difficult to imagine for heroes of this legend two officers of infantry of the line, for example, whose fantasy is tamed by much walking exercise, and whose valour necessarily must be of a more plodding kind. As to gunners or engineers, whose heads are kept cool on a diet of mathematics, it is simply unthinkable.
posted by bukvich at 7:31 AM on January 5, 2016 [2 favorites]

This is good advice for responding to comments. Pony request: can we have a MetaDuel subsite, for when this advice breaks down?

All duels must be conducted with broadswords on an island in the bottom of a 12-foot-deep pit divided by a wooden plank that neither party may cross.
posted by leotrotsky at 7:35 AM on January 5, 2016 [8 favorites]

The framing on this is a little odd. It almost makes it sound like Roberts was applauding the efficiency of dueling. In fact if one reads the actual report (pdf) he is clearly making the point that if the courts are not seen as a sound guarantor of justice there is a danger of regressing to violent extrajudicial dispute resolution mechanisms like dueling. He's trying to liven up a fairly dry discussion of the 2015 civil rules amendments with a historical reminder of why the court system exists and why it needs to be perceived to offer "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding."

(My many problems with Justice Roberts are a whole other conversation.)
posted by Wretch729 at 7:35 AM on January 5, 2016 [5 favorites]

See also The Duellists.
posted by exogenous at 7:37 AM on January 5, 2016 [3 favorites]

So what is Roberts talking about? Given the lack of background information in the first link, it all comes across as very abstract and vague. It sounds like he's just saying "hurry up and justice," but I was unaware that slow justice was considered a special or recent problem.
posted by Edgewise at 8:10 AM on January 5, 2016

Or, if you prefer your duel rules in the form of a catchy song, might I recommend Hamilton?

You should check out the cast in action in the HAM4HAM video.
posted by MrGuilt at 8:14 AM on January 5, 2016 [4 favorites]

Madam, I challenge you to a duel. TMBG.
posted by fzx101 at 8:17 AM on January 5, 2016 [1 favorite]

Pony request: can we have a MetaDuel subsite, for when this advice breaks down?

Aww contrair, mon friend, this calls for a MeetUp, at dawn, on the moor, in the mists; my second will approach your second.


(nerf sabers at dawn)
posted by sammyo at 8:24 AM on January 5, 2016 [3 favorites]

Oh God, this reminds me to much of that far right-wing kook of an author, let's call him Tank Marmot. He would respond to people criticizing how his books had SS officers as heroes, with challenges to duel. He probably still does, in the few online venues he hasn't been banned from.
posted by happyroach at 8:29 AM on January 5, 2016 [1 favorite]

I only duel with loud, smoky diesel trucks carrying combustible liquids.
posted by sandettie light vessel automatic at 8:32 AM on January 5, 2016 [1 favorite]

Aww contrair, mon friend, this calls for a MeetUp

Joining Us?

_ Yes
_ Maybe
posted by GenjiandProust at 8:34 AM on January 5, 2016

Here’s an amusing article about the inveterate French duellist (and asymmetric hairstyle pioneer) François de Montmorency-Bouteville.
posted by misteraitch at 8:36 AM on January 5, 2016

So what is Roberts talking about? Given the lack of background information in the first link, it all comes across as very abstract and vague. It sounds like he's just saying "hurry up and justice," but I was unaware that slow justice was considered a special or recent problem.

He's using the 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as an extortion to judges to manage thier cases more proactively [pdf]:

"Faced with crushing dockets, judges can be tempted to postpone engagement in pretrial activities. Experience has shown, however, that judges who are knowledgeable, actively engaged, and accessible early in the process are far more effective in resolving cases fairly and efficiently, because they can identify the critical issues, determine the appropriate breadth of discovery, and curtail dilatory tactics, gamesmanship, and procedural posturing."

He opens with an odd historical document, and circles back to duels at the end. It's just a way of making a really boring year end report a little more interesting.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:43 AM on January 5, 2016 [2 favorites]

hee. I know it's just an innocent typo but am now giggling imagining Roberts extorting judges. "Now I want these cases outta here by tomorrow, see? Or I send these "depositions" to your wife!"
posted by Wretch729 at 9:04 AM on January 5, 2016 [3 favorites]

So in a MetaDuel, the loser gets his or her account locked ("killed"), and has to pony up $5 for a new account?
posted by fings at 9:11 AM on January 5, 2016

So if you read the rules, it mentions "posting" somebody in several places, e.g. if party A doesn't follow rule x, then party B may post party A - anybody have any idea what that is about?
posted by Dr Dracator at 9:32 AM on January 5, 2016

I was able to google an answer in re posting:

A statement accusing them of cowardice would be hung in public areas or published in a newspaper or pamphlet.

Classy.
posted by paper chromatographologist at 9:47 AM on January 5, 2016 [2 favorites]

post = put party A on blast
posted by Navelgazer at 9:49 AM on January 5, 2016

That was a really interesting read, especially the part about insults that result from inebriation, and the limitations that exist in mitigating such circumstances with certainty.
posted by SpacemanStix at 10:04 AM on January 5, 2016

The dueling part was interesting, and I'm not surprised it came from the Governor of South Carolina, a place where violence and honor intersect quite frequently. However, to address Chief Justice Roberts' complaint, the pace of the federal judiciary might prove if his fellow Republicans in the Senate would do a better job of confirming judicial appointments.
posted by TedW at 10:12 AM on January 5, 2016

he is clearly making the point that if the courts are not seen as a sound guarantor of justice there is a danger of regressing to violent extrajudicial dispute resolution mechanisms like dueling.

And yet Justice Roberts has been the biggest force blocking access to the courts for plantiffs in favor of a rigged corporate extrajudicial dispute resolution mechanism called arbitration.

Frankly, I think dueling might be a more fair system than the one Justice Roberts wants us to use.
posted by zachlipton at 10:13 AM on January 5, 2016 [3 favorites]

GenjiandProust: "Aww contrair, mon friend, this calls for a MeetUp

Joining Us?

_ Yes
_ Maybe"
_Pistols at dawn
posted by Splunge at 10:41 AM on January 5, 2016 [1 favorite]

In Iowa being in a duel used to preclude you from holding public office, but we addressed this travesty by repealing this law. Now I just need to get that cad Steve King to have his seconds call on mine.
posted by cjorgensen at 10:53 AM on January 5, 2016 [1 favorite]

The Chief Justice missed the opportunity to really dig into the analogies between dueling and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure:

• Reorganization of Rule 26(b)(1) brings proportionality factors to the forefront of considerations whether one should react to a perceived insult
• Revision of Rule 34 to require more specific objections and responses to requests for clarification on the ground rules of a proposed duel
• Elimination of Rule 84 and the Appendix of Forms leading to a potential change in requirements for structuring a challenge to a duel

posted by exogenous at 1:01 PM on January 5, 2016

Rule 34 has been seriously misinterpreted through the years.
posted by TedW at 4:52 PM on January 5, 2016 [1 favorite]