u/redditorialacious

Add a comment with a photo of 10 physical Switch 1 games of your choice. Only two rules.. no code-in-box, and only 1 game maximum that's exclusive to Japan/Asia. Try to make it a selection of 10 games that no one else will have! If you see a comment where you own at least 9/10 of the games, reply with a photo! (If you're the person that has a full set, maybe refrain from commenting on others 😂)

Then those logical people were told to not alter the question and that everyone means everyone. No assuming. Everything is crystal clear.

So now we have to assume (gasp) that for babies if they say GAGA it's red and if they say GUGU it's blue. For paralysed people it'll be their telepathic powers. We also have to assume the question is presented to everyone in English? Or native language? If native language then what's the point having babies vote if the whole point is to read the question? So god knows what people are thinking there. Oh and there's the infamous colourblind. They're just going off shits and giggles. Blind people better have a habit of pushing random buttons because otherwise they will be stuck forever.

Do Siamese twins get one vote or two?

But who knows. We aren't allowed to "assume".

Edit: The language thing is huge. China and India population together is almost 3 billion alone. According to the internet only 3 percent of China can speak fluent English. Even if we bring that up to 10 percent, that's 90 percent of random voters.

Are we now assuming that they can "obviously" see the question in a language they know? Can I then circle you back to "obviously" babies can't read? So are we making assumptions or not?

I think this might have actually solved the button problem :) (it's dumb)

Edit: If someone online asked "Everyone is asked their favourite primary colour, what do you think the percentage of people chose blue" would you assume by everyone they are including paralysed people, new born babies, colourblind people and people in a coma, or would you assume it means they are asking people that understand the question and can communicate?

You wake up from your sleep tomorrow. A genie appears in front of you and says:

"You see that red button blue button thing you've been reading about online... That took place while you were asleep. You are the only person in the whole world I totally forgot to wake up and ask to take part. Oops! Don't worry, your lack of vote didn't count for either side, and you're alive".

The genie does not tell anyone how many votes the winning side won by.

Obviously if blue won you're happy.

If you find out red won, what is your first and overriding thought? Is it..

1. This is so unfair!!! My vote could have made all the difference!!! It's so unfair I didn't get to vote!! If I voted, chances are all my loved ones and a lot of the population would still be alive!!! I demand my vote!!!!!!! I can't believe I slept through that somehow!!

2. Fuck, fuck, fuck. What did my baby press. What did my loved ones press. I hope they chose red. Where's my phone? I need to find out who is alive!! Fuck I hope my mum picked red. Hello!!! Who's home??? I'm glad you picked red, oh my god don't tell me your brother picked blue.

Which one is your overriding thought process, one or two?

A lot of blue pressers argue that they are pressing it not because they are misunderstanding the question, but because they want to save those that are not able to comprehend the question for various reasons (babies, dementia, severe colourblind etc). Ok, that I can understand (though my logical argument is that *your* single vote won't tip it over 50 percent so you should save yourself).

How about thinking of it this way. If blue pressers do actually understand the question fully, then do you realise this:

The question itself is evil, if it were real the only evil person is the one who designed such a thing, and that you can help minimise the casualties in a meaningful way with your vote.

Rather than have your single vote mean nothing (it statistically will simply NOT be the decider vote - either blue wins anyway OR you suicide for no reason), your vote can actually mean something and guaranteed save a life (yours! Yes, YOU matter).

If I had to guess, the population of people under 12, people who are severely colourblind and people who have severe learning difficulties is probably around 20 percent of the world population. We can debate this number, but let's go with it.

If 20 percent of people chose at complete random, then that means that 10 percent of the population will press blue.

Due to this evil experiment (and at no fault of anyone) 10 percent of the population are dying.

Rather than voting blue and increasing this number up to potentially 49.9 percent (which is catastrophic), and again your vote likely won't matter anyways, why not guarantee your survival (your life matters!), do the logical thing and keep that number at 10 percent?

Yes. If the majority pressed blue it will be that no one dies, but LOSING TEN PERCENT OF THE POPULATION (and the population that at that moment in time isn't the ones making the world go round) IS FAR LESS CATASTROPHIC THAN LOSING UP TO 49 PERCENT!! We need YOU, blue pressers that actually understand the question! YOU matter and we need you to make the world go round!!

Is this a different way to look at it? Thoughts? Remember I am assuming blue pressers understand the question fully and are pressing blue to save lives, not because they are misunderstanding the question, which is the main argument for blue)

Just want to say it was a breath of fresh air watching a team play free flowing football and not be afraid to kick the ball up and go forwards, even when leading. Moyes is absolute class and I can see Everton fighting for European spots from the start next year. Also very electric fans in the stadium that was the 12th player 🤞🏼

I like thinking out of the box but I can't get my head around why anyone would pick blue. I've read all the guilt tripping and red = bad takes.

But remember, the poll doesn't allow us to have a discussion before hand, it is sprung onto us without proper communication. However I want to have an open mind. Here is my take below.

You are not pushing red because you are a bad person. You are pushing red because you are smart. 

Let's say I have four babies. Of course I don't want them to die. Let's say they randomly picked and two chose red and two chose blue (or 3 to 1, or even very unlikely but 4 to 0 either way). I WOULD STILL PICK RED. 

On a plane you put your own mask on first before helping others. I need to ensure my survival to look after my children, especially in a world that may be about to go into chaos. STATISTICALLY IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR MY SINGLE VOTE TO MAKE THE DIFFERENCE. There is more chance I die or become disabled on the way to work when trying to earn money to feed my kids. What should I do, never leave the house? NO MAJOR VOTE IN HISTORY HAS BEEN DECIDED ON ONE VOTE, AND THAT STATISTICALLY ISNT GOING TO CHANGE WITH BILLIONS (BILLIONS!!) OF VOTERS! Therefore I will guarantee my survival and be here to look after my children that either will all be alive because of low IQ (as in people who actually didn't understand the question)/random button pushers, or they might be alive because they pushed red. THERE IS AN INFINITELY MORE CHANCE MY KID(S) CHOSE RED THAN THEM CHOOSING BLUE AND MY ONE SINGLE DECISION BEING THE ONE TO KILL THEM OFF. Bringing babies into this only gives me more reason, as an individual parent and ONE SINGLE VOTE to vote red. And yes, if blue majority wins I will be able to sleep at night, because it's the creator of such a disastrous poll that should be the one losing sleep. And no I won't entertain the fact of WHAT IF IT WAS MY SINGLE VOTE THAT SWAYED IT TO RED AND KILLED HALF THE WORLD, because I don't think about statistically improbable things as then I would never leave the house in fear of dying. There's more chance I am struck by lightning. But if it helps you sleep at night, you're pushing red because you're smart, you're not a bad person, it's the blue pushers narrative to think they are bigger than life itself, and it's the creator of this scenario (if it were real) that would be evil.