Ball Knower

@Sonrilol @const_ I always understood blue and obviously hope they win but the assumption that red wants to murder everyone is silly. Though not unwarranted I have seen some nasty people on both sides

@const_ @vrballknowervr That we did. Tbh I've learned a lot about the red presser mindset through all the back and forth. I'd still pick blue but their position and what leads them to that choice makes more sense to me now. For the ones that aren't like "Red is logic, I am very smart" at least.

anyone feeling superior about choosing the red button needs to learn about the concept of second order effects.

@shunnedmorlock If you maximize survial instead of minimizing death then at max a small percentage would sadly pass. If you try to minimize death and only get 49% then thats is not onlt the worst case scenario but it was caused by those who voted blue

If 100% of people vote blue, no one dies. If 100% of people vote red, no one dies. This is true. If 51% of people vote blue, no one dies. If 51% of people vote red, 49% of people die. If our goal is to minimize death, it is far easier to get 51% to act in concert than 100%.

@Bigtomk22YT 🚨genuine idiot alert🚨

The strike zone fix sounds good. I'll still never notice the PCI shrinkage on All-star or below. Lower exit velocity by 20% and get rid of created stadiums in online games SDS. Bring actual baseball back to your game.

@Sonrilol @const_ It is for the benefit of other people who picked blue only. But the people you “save” are those who could have saved themselves if they hadnt picked blue. And if blue does not work then everyone who picked it sacrificed their life for literally 0 reason

@vrballknowervr @const_ You are sacrificing yourself for the benefit of others when you pick blue, I don't think you can argue against that. I think most red voters would pick blue if for example it was like only their family and friends voting and they knew someone had picked blue already.

@Sonrilol @const_ Yes but red is saving themselves and blue is possibly saving themselves with the added possibility of death but blue thinks they are making some noble sacrifice.

@vrballknowervr @const_ You think it's a lot, for people picking blue it's either not that risky or worth taking anyway. Yes everyone could have just picked red, but in the real world that is not going to happen, it will be closer to a 50/50.

@Sonrilol @const_ You risk a lot for the possibility to save other blues. You are not saving reds as they have saved themselves so feeling good about it is non sensical you all saved only blues who COULD have saved THEMSELF

@vrballknowervr @const_ Let me refine what I said earlier. Blue is willing to take some risk for strangers, Red is less willing. I think it's fair to say that both perceive the risk very differently. For red it's extremely risky, for blue it's reasonable.

@Sonrilol @const_ It is not a viewpoint. There is no danger until you pick blue thus blue creates their own risk. Look at it as you are forced to shoot someone if blue doesnt win. Red doesnt want any part of that but blue is fine with that risk. A life is a life

@vrballknowervr @const_ Again that's a viewpoint argument. I could literally flip what you jus said: You are taking other people's lives unlike blue. There's nothing good about that. Blue only kills myself. Lie to yourself if it makes you feel better but red is the only one endangering anyone.

@Sonrilol @const_ You are taking your own life unlike red. Theres nothing good about that. Red is not killing anyone. Lie to urself if it makes u feel better but blue is the only one endagering anyone

@vrballknowervr @const_ That's true, but in that case my moral imperative of not killing others takes precedence. On the actual vote I can't know if I can or can't help blue win, you can just guess so I imagine it's at 50/50.

@Sonrilol @const_ You just said in a vote where you knew you couldnt help blue win you would still vote blue or else you would feel bad. That is prioritizing yourself. While red would be prioritizing the group.

@vrballknowervr @const_ Because it is, you are either someone who prioritizes yourself or someone who prioritizes the group.

@Sonrilol @const_ You activley said its a “question of character”

@vrballknowervr @const_ I'm not attacking anyone's character I think both red and blue can be correct answers, depending on the individual.

@theramblingfool If you want to put the vote in reality it falls apart bc some groups physically can’t vote. Ignoring that, if every capable person voted red the upper range of people that COULD die goes down drastically. (People saying they would rather die than blank are probably lying btw)

Pro-red responses I've seen, when confronted with the possibility someone they care about might press blue: (1) No one I care about would ever press blue (really?) (2) [insert problematic group] aren't included in the hypo (wrong) (3) Those loved ones have to die (psychopathic)

@Sonrilol @const_ I suppose you can but if ones values is to want to kill peoples i think you would have an issue. Red is an objectively safer choice and does not endanger anyone so its crazy to then attack peoples character over it when u said ud rather die than live knowing it changes nothing

@vrballknowervr @const_ Why is it not rational to act according to your own values.

@VGBC_GimR If you are insinuating you would risk your whole entire life to save random kids who might be in danger surely you have $0 in your bank account because you donate everything to those in need. Otherwise ur just playing dress up as “hero”

Blues: come on guys, if we just get over 50% we can save everyone! Reds: if you press blue, you’re just killing yourself. No one has made a single coherent argument as to why I should press it. If everyone just pressed it no one is in danger. And you know what!? Blues are actually the immoral ones because- Blues: what about children? Many of them will select a button at random. Reds:

@Sonrilol @const_ Red is not killing blue as it was blues own choice. If u still would feel guilty I see y u would pick blue but thats not a rational choice at that point its just selfish bc u would feel bad and would die instead of helping the survivors

@vrballknowervr @const_ Yes I think I made that clear earlier. For me killing another human is already unthinkable, let alone 4 billion, I would sooner die. For me personally, it's ideological. I vote blue at any percent 1 48 88 100.

@Sonrilol @const_ If you were the last person to vote and saw that blue only has 48% what would you vote. Same question but now you see blue has 88%.

@vrballknowervr @const_ Then red is right for you. Blue don't like that gamble (or many other ones) and blue is right for them.

@Sonrilol @const_ The only situation in which I would feel bad is if blue lost by 1 vote. In which case the sole responsobility would not lie on me and the actual chances of that happening is so microscopic I would be more likely to win 9 figures in the lottery multiple times.

@vrballknowervr @const_ Yes but you don't know that when you vote. It could also be the deciding blue win vote. Any outcome is possible. You need to be comfortable with all possible outcomes of your vote. Still blue, if we win I didn't kill anyone if we lose I took the only choice that could avoid it.

@JayExci red doesnt expect everyone to survive. Just those that want to. If u want to throw away ur life who am I to stop u

@Sonrilol @const_ Yes and picking blue means theres a chance that number goes higher. If blue said it killed a random person instead of u if the vote didnt reach 50% and red kills no one what would you pick

@vrballknowervr @const_ It's a loss because nearly a billion people die, the greatest death toll in human history, an unprecedented tragedy of biblical proportions.

@Sonrilol @const_ If 88% of people vote red thats a loss because ur side decided to end ur self?

@vrballknowervr @const_ If red wins everyone loses.

@Sonrilol @const_ Lets say blue doesnt win. You added to the death tally, will not be there to help rebuild society, and are currently blaming it on those who will have to care for others kids, and are calling it selfless. If blue wins red wins too

@vrballknowervr @const_ Picking blue could save billions of people! I think you can even make the argument it tries to save all of humanity from the hell of a red win world. It's precisely because there's no guarantee that it tests your character.