3 ms·

There seems to be a lot of that at play in white-shoe firms. Perhaps less so now than when those positions were guaranteed for life, but some of the highest-pow

There seems to be a lot of that at play in white-shoe firms. Perhaps less so now than when those positions were guaranteed for life, but some of the highest-powered lawyers I've known didn't have much intuitive sense that they were actually affecting people.

notyourday 9y ago
There's a fundamental misunderstanding of reality in legal profession. It is somewhat akin to 18th and 19th century conflicts - two armies line up against each other and both sides shoot. Strangely even though the last man standing won the decorum mattered. That is until someone had a brilliant idea to shoot from the laying down position. Or from the bushes. Or without wearing uniforms.
- lostboys67 9y ago
  In the Napoleonic wars Wellingtons order for troops to wait lying down on a reverse slope to avoid cannon fire was considered unsporting
  - bluGill 9y ago
    Up until about the US civil war guns were inaccurate enough that you could stand in lines and shoot at each other with a chance to live. As such the old battle lines designed for swords were not a horrible strategy (not to be confused with good). By the US civil war rifles advanced to the point where you could shoot a target and have confidence that it would die. Wars that happened around the US civil war were suddenly and unexpected deadly which caused all generals (who watch wars between insignificant countries which the US was at the time) to be horrified and come up with new tactics without regard for previous ideas of what was sporting.
- TheCoelacanth 9y ago
  It's a fundamental misunderstanding of 18th and 19th century infantry tactics to say that they fought that way out of a sense of decorum and that no one had the idea of using concealment or cover. They fought in massed formations because it actually was the most effective way of fighting with the technology of the time. Infantry troops that strayed too far from their formations were extremely vulnerable to attack by more mobile cavalry troops. It was only in massed formations that they were able to effectively repel cavalry attacks.
  - notyourday 9y ago
    Oh rubbish. See Napoleon's excursion into Russia. See Suvorov's crossing of the Alps.
    - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
      Not seeing how either of those instances disprove my point.

notyourday 9y ago

There's a fundamental misunderstanding of reality in legal profession. It is somewhat akin to 18th and 19th century conflicts - two armies line up against each other and both sides shoot. Strangely even though the last man standing won the decorum mattered. That is until someone had a brilliant idea to shoot from the laying down position. Or from the bushes. Or without wearing uniforms.

lostboys67 9y ago
In the Napoleonic wars Wellingtons order for troops to wait lying down on a reverse slope to avoid cannon fire was considered unsporting
- bluGill 9y ago
  Up until about the US civil war guns were inaccurate enough that you could stand in lines and shoot at each other with a chance to live. As such the old battle lines designed for swords were not a horrible strategy (not to be confused with good). By the US civil war rifles advanced to the point where you could shoot a target and have confidence that it would die. Wars that happened around the US civil war were suddenly and unexpected deadly which caused all generals (who watch wars between insignificant countries which the US was at the time) to be horrified and come up with new tactics without regard for previous ideas of what was sporting.
TheCoelacanth 9y ago
It's a fundamental misunderstanding of 18th and 19th century infantry tactics to say that they fought that way out of a sense of decorum and that no one had the idea of using concealment or cover. They fought in massed formations because it actually was the most effective way of fighting with the technology of the time. Infantry troops that strayed too far from their formations were extremely vulnerable to attack by more mobile cavalry troops. It was only in massed formations that they were able to effectively repel cavalry attacks.
- notyourday 9y ago
  Oh rubbish. See Napoleon's excursion into Russia. See Suvorov's crossing of the Alps.
  - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
    Not seeing how either of those instances disprove my point.