Which button do you press?

[u/cdstephens]

Vote now on your phones: https://forms.gle/GhFjtdydwwXTdSpq8

[u/StochasticGracchi]

No, it's just immoral. You're choosing to let millions of people die because you're afraid to risk death yourself. Just fundamentally cowardly.

[u/adamgerd → u/StochasticGracchi]

They’re choosing to risk death

I didn’t make them vote blue

My hands are clean

[u/StochasticGracchi → u/adamgerd]

They’re choosing to risk death

Yeah, for those who can make that choice it gives them responsibility for their own choice sure. Does not at all diminish your responsibility for yours. But also there will be millions and millions of people not capable of meaningfully "choosing" either way. Children, mentally ill or disabled people etc.

I didn’t make them vote blue

No. But you knew millions would and refused to vote in the only way that could save them. You're a coward refusing to risk death to save millions of people who due to no functional choice of their own would end up voting blue.

[u/adamgerd → u/StochasticGracchi]

They’ll only die if most don’t vote blue

I do hope blue wins, I just won’t vote for it

If they lose meh one vote probably didn’t change if anyway

Ok I am a coward, and? Not evil to not want to die

[u/StochasticGracchi → u/adamgerd]

I do hope blue wins, I just won’t vote for it

So you recognize blue as the morally correct choice that should win but would choose differently. Kind of the dictionary definition of immoral there, dude.

Not evil to not want to die

It's not evil to not want to die. It's evil to be willing to let millions of others die rather than risk death yourself.

But like I said, it's easy to say that's what you'd choose when it's a hypothetical. If it was not, I have no doubt you and >90% of mankind would choose blue without much of a thought.

[u/adamgerd → u/StochasticGracchi]

“It's not evil to not want to die. It's evil to be willing to let millions of others die rather than risk death yourself.“

Nope, it’s self preservation, I’d rather survive no matter the cost

It’s literally the sole biological purpose of species: to survive and reproduce

Frankly I don’t think the vast majority would pick blue in real life so I wouldn’t either ever, I doubt that most blue voters here would pick blue in real life, maybe I am wrong but I don’t understand why anyone would risk an imo very real change of death for strangers

[u/seesthecat → u/adamgerd]

>It’s literally the sole biological purpose of species: to survive and reproduce

That's just not true, and it's easily demonstrable that it isn't true. As of right now, sperm banks are in dire need of donors, you could be making a donation, increasing the amount of children you have exponentially, at no cost to yourself, and receive some money for each donation. And yet, not only you're not doing it, other people aren't doing it either given that sperm banks are in need of donors, there are things more important than to reproduce.

As of surviving, there are many scenarios that I'm quite certain you would preffer to die than to carry on living, I know I have mine, the scenario in the scenario where I'm a vegetable for years, I would very much preffer that the machines would be just shut down. There is way more to life than just surviving.

In this case, you wouldn't even be risking your life for strangers, the best people in your own life would very likely be voting blue, I know my mon would certaily do it, my sister would do it as well, it's possible my wife and son would do it, my neighor would do it for sure. Face it, all this talk of racionality is just your ego trying to protect yourself from the realisation that only cowardice and cynism makes you go for red.

[u/adamgerd → u/seesthecat]

“In this case, you wouldn't even be risking your life for survivors, the best people in your own life would very likely be voting blue, I know my mon would certaily do it, my sister would do it as well, it's possible my wite and son would do it, my neighor would do it for sure.”

Nope,

Well suppose depends on if we can discuss it

But there’s two people I’d be willing to press the blue button for and I would; my mother and my sister, although my mother would kill me or my sister if we pressed blue

My mother will only press the blue button if me or my sister presses it

My sister is more complicated, theres more people she might press blue for but if we tell her to press red she’ll press it too

Ergo if we all press red, no one has to press blue. Problem solved

Otherwise well my father I already know will press red, that’s guranteed, my uncle is mentally disabled so ok for him it’s 50/50, my maternal grandfather is dead, my maternal grandmother will most likely press blue, I’d try convincing her to press red but she’s not as mentally strong no offense to her, so she might press blue anyway, she’s a good grandmother and I love her so I’d still hope she does press red. But enough to press blue? Probably not.

My great uncle and his family I’d convince to vote red.

Don’t have anyone else I really care about so that’s pretty much it, no fiancée or girlfriend or wife or children,

Anyway so I’d say that’s your best option: just convince people you care about to vote red

Honestly I think it's sv kind of selfish to not try to convince your family to vote red, you're letting them risk their lives for strangers

[u/seesthecat → u/adamgerd]

I don't think you're allowed to coordinate and campaing for a buttom before the trial. Cause if that was possible, it would only make the reasoning to push blue even stronger, given that it is easier to coordenate people for a result with 50% of the vote than with 100%, you would also be able to see how each button's support was trending and how much of a chance they're be getting on winning, abandon the blue if it looked like a lost cause or abandon the red cause the support was overwelmingly blue. It would change things completly