Sociopath Community

More like your choice will assure a x2 bonus on the death count. 

Turncoat said: 

More like your choice will assure a x2 bonus on the death count. 

 There are no assurances of death to begin with. 

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

More like your choice will assure a x2 bonus on the death count. 

 There are no assurances of death to begin with. 

Okay... at this point your answer is to deny the trolly problem itself. 

If you pass the problem onto the next person, and any person down the line accepts killing the current number of people, then you have allowed yourself to kill that many more people through passing the choice on than the number that would have died had you ended it before it became their turn. 

We've established that the most selfish of people, let alone those who follow reductive logic or even basic math, would find reason to stop the count from rising. The 'common sense' metric is to stop it from doubling before it gets worse. Therefor, your choice to pass it onto the next person is simply you choosing to kill more people. 

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

More like your choice will assure a x2 bonus on the death count. 

 There are no assurances of death to begin with. 

Okay... at this point your answer is to deny the trolly problem itself. 

If you pass the problem onto the next person, and any person down the line accepts killing the current number of people, then you have allowed yourself to kill that many more people through passing the choice on. 

 That's like page 1 stuff dude. Yes Nathan, first is the worst. 

Are we going to start going backward again ?

So you're fine with x2-ing the death count? 

Turncoat said:

We've established that the most selfish of people, let alone those who follow reductive logic or even basic math, would find reason to stop the count from rising. The 'common sense' metric is to stop it from doubling before it gets worse. Therefor, your choice to pass it onto the next person is simply you choosing to kill more people.

 I address that already. Only if the final pass means certain death for all, would killing the first person be the best move. 

If the 33rd person passes, the game should end. If that's not the case, then kill the first person.  

I don't think a vast majority would carry the burden of killing people, and as it adds up even more so. For that reason, and granted the rules are clear that no one dies unless someone says so till 33 people, it's extremely likely we can go 33 rounds without a single death count. 

.

.

.

I'd also think 33 people would be fine, as long as they don't see it as they would a video game, and they certainly wouldn't. If the whole world had a turn, then I'd kill the first person for sure.  

This whole "There's worse than the Devil" isn't really the case either.  That would insinuate rules that imply imminent death which I don't think is the case. 

Turncoat said: 

So you're fine with x2-ing the death count? 

 Of course not. I'm literally the only one here trying to save every last person. 

.

What this game actually is. A slow consensus on how many people will die. 

If we take 33 people, and just lay it out to them how many people should die. It would very often be a perfect 0.

If all 8 billion of us had to decide, there will certainly be blood. 

When you make it out to be a game like this, you trigger insecurities, and all of these crazy "what ifs" come about, and Ohhh the game will spell death for the whole world after 33, and the game is endless !

.

.

.

To this degree, the game is not even worth debating as it has no clear rules as to what happens past 33 turns. I made my own rules, and so did you.

I said the game should end at 33, you oppose that for some reason and if the game doesn't end when it breaks, then for sure kill the first person. I said that a few times now. 

If this was a real thing, the planet who survives this, without incident is ready to be a Type 1 Civilization.

I don't think a vast majority would carry the burden of killing people, and as it adds up even more so. For that reason, and granted the rules are clear that no one dies unless someone says so till 33 people, it's extremely likely we can go 33 rounds without a single death count.

Let's test that theory.

It's 256 people now. It's your turn Spatial. and then we roll the dice to see who goes next.

What do you choose? Pull the lever, or not?

Jada said: 

I don't think a vast majority would carry the burden of killing people, and as it adds up even more so. For that reason, and granted the rules are clear that no one dies unless someone says so till 33 people, it's extremely likely we can go 33 rounds without a single death count.

Let's test that theory.

It's 256 people now. It's your turn Spatial. and then we roll the dice to see who goes next.

What do you choose? Pull the lever, or not?

 Dice....

I can't man, sorry.  

Next is Dragoonback:

https://pickerwheel.com/result/?id=5sRCVu

It's 512 people.

Dragoonback, pull the lever, or no?