Dueling Clarification/FAQs

What is a Scientists' Duel?

As opposed to a traditional gentlemens' duel in which the participants try very hard to wound or kill each other, a Scientists' Duel is a rather gentler sport. In this, 2 scientists agree upon a paper to read and publicly explain (e.g., through research blogging). The public then gets 100 points to divide between the participating scientists as they see fit based upon the quality of their explanations. After a set time period of voting, points are added up and a winner is declared.


How do the participating scientists choose a paper?

However they wish to and feel it fair, but it must be mutually agreed upon. In my duel with Hermitage, we chose the brain-machine interface paper because it is far outside each of our respective expertise, which we felt would make the competition fair. At the same time, a duel between scientists within closely related expertise upon a paper from their field would also be fair.


How do readers judge the Dueling Scientists?

However they want to. But generally comprehension, intelligibility, and accessibility are good benchmarks.


What benefits are there to Scientists' Duels?

Not only do these duels get more than 1 interpretation of otherwise unpublicized research out into the ether for knowledge and consumption, but it also adds a fun element of competition. Concurrently, Scientists' Duels accord an inherent worth upon a scientist's ability to concisely and clearly explain complicated research, which is a win for both their readers and the scientist's skills.


I want to Duel a Scientist. How do I do so?

Contact the scientist in question, let them know what you're about and see if they're up for it. This would be where you challenge them. At that point you can invite submissions for dueling material from your readers or work it out with the scientist you challenged. Either way, for the duel to be fair, the material must be mutually agreed upon. Then you read the paper, write about it, and post that. Let your readers know it's part of a duel and provide a link to your opponent's entry. It would also help to aggregate it into Research Blogging. Then sit back and let your readers vote.


Add other unclear questions in comments and I shall amend this post to include them.

Let's Have a Duel!

I would like to see more Scientists' Duels.

Kinda like that, but sciencier. Maybe they have rancors attached to the end of those ropes.

Sure, dueling was widely regarded as a vile gentlemen's sport in the 19th century, but that, I suspect, was primarily because it involved rather a lot of pistols, sabres, death, and fluffy shirts*. Nonetheless, dueling was a visceral bloodsport that involved honor and competition. I'm not advocating that we turn to scientific bloodsport** for amusement and funding, but rather that we start competing intellectually. Yes, we as scientists already compete upon the scientific edge, trying desperately sometimes not to be scooped as we race to publish data and inadvertantly grind graduate students' free will*** to dust in the process. But at the same time, friendly, rigorous competition is a good thing as it raises standards and adds a slight sheen of adrenalin to even the most esoteric of topics.

If future Scientists' Duels were to take place in the form of competing research blogging, the benefits would be manifold. Namely:

1) Intellectual competition is fun.
2) Important research is disseminated.
3) An inherent value in explaining complicated science for uninvested audiences emerges.
4) More scientists communicate outside of their fields, thereby increasing their explanatory flexibility.
5) Research gets explained more than one way in each Duel, which would allow those with different knowledge-absorbing patterns to more effectively learn what it means.

I am not explicitly saying that I will take on any and all comers in challenging me to a Scientists' Duel, but I am implying it while trying to encourage others to square off and Duel for themselves.

Thoughts, ideas, encomium, and/or**** excoriation?

*Which I do believe I could pull off admirably, the shirts, I mean, not the pistols. Anyone up for a bout with quarterstaves?
**Like writing grants, but with sharp, pointy things. Come to think of it, an actual duel may be easier, and preferable for both parties, than endless traction of 2 closely scored grants in study section. But I digress.
***That's a joke, I think...
****The English language really needs an "and/or" functionality. "Else" is inexact. Therefore I propse "twick" and/or "andort". The added "t" makes it cooler.

Scientists' Duel Outcome

Hermie won*.

The final score was 205 Hermitage, 195 Toaster.

Poop.

But at least I only lost by 10 points instead of only getting 10 points!!! She graciously extended the offer to me to not count the midnight dark horse Erk, which would have resulted in me winning, but as I am a Mad Scientist with integrity, I decided that responsibility to the rules was more important than my own ego and we counted their votes anyway.

However, let it be known that this is far from my last duel!

*Gloating can be found here.