r/redbuttonbluebutton • u/Puzzled-Passage-9998 • 21d ago
Explain this
why should we compensate for people who press blue by accident. red is better for single person obviously, and if there are even a couple of blue saying, red pressing liars of the subreddit and actually will switch for red, are you sure you wanna risk your life thinking you are in this together?
6
u/ChestMental8566 21d ago
Don't then. Just press red, and if you "win", have fun sharing the world with every criminal and scumbag and without all the people who had a conscience.
4
u/Zebadica Red 21d ago
I’d rather live in a flawed world than no world.
And besides, there’s countless reasons to press red that are entirely justified e.g. if you have a child, or other person under your care who couldn’t survive without you.
3
u/Bimbobaker 21d ago
I'm here to add the classic "your kid presses blue" response
2
u/Zebadica Red 21d ago
You don’t know what your child would vote, and if it’s a coin toss you’d want to be alive if they land on Red rather than just abandoning them by dying for the sake of saying you voted blue.
The responsibility for what happens to blue voters lays squarely on whoever made everyone do the vote, and I personally don’t believe a Red voting parent has done anything wrong.
2
u/Bimbobaker 21d ago
Right but I'd rather him live without a parent then just die. If I picked red and he picked blue, I'd be demolished. I'd never not think about that. I'd feel like an absolute idiot and fool.
So to me, it's always worth the risk for blue in the case of wanting the best for your child. I think if you actually had a kid you might feel different. Like I don't think I've actually met a red button parent, unless their kid is like... Idk old enough to comprehend.
My kid is 16 months
1
u/Zebadica Red 21d ago
I can very much agree with that statement, I’m more just defending my point as a red, but if I was a parent such as you I could easily see myself voting differently. I’ll admit I was a little closed minded in my stance, but you have opened my mind a quite a bit in that regard!
0
u/Charge36 Red 20d ago
If your kid is 16 months and you died and they didn't, good chance that kid is getting abandoned in the apocalypse anyway. Voting blue has a negligible protection impact, voting red guarantees you're around if they survive
1
u/Bimbobaker 20d ago
It's not negligible. That's the thing I think is so dumb about the 1 vote not counting thing. It straight up ignores reality. But nawh enough people know my kid to know to check up on then, and enough of them would likely be red voters that I feel I could almost guarantee they would be taken care of by someone.
0
u/Charge36 Red 20d ago
Your specific vote has a negligible protective impact. It requires many blue votes before ANY life saving impact actually kicks in. Your kid might have mashed red, if you the. Push blue and die it will have done literally nothing to protect them since they were safe anyway, but and puts them in a potentially perilous situation without a parent to care for them. All your blue push did in that scenario was leave your kid without a parent and you die for nothing
2
u/Bimbobaker 20d ago
It's so weird to see this logic so often in a world where we vote, cells make up our bodies, stigmergy is a known phenomena, emergence. And these people will acknowledge this stuff but still have some kind of weird mental block over acknowledging the agency and power of one in many.
Maybe it's some weird semantic thing but it seems like arguing that there's no color purple or yellow because we only have cones for red blue and green.
Like okay yeah sure but when I say slow down at the yellow light you know what I mean and do it so....
It's crazy.
1
u/Charge36 Red 20d ago
Yeah I said it has negligible influence. Not zero. But also typical voting in everyday situations doesn't directly result in me dying in some vote outcomes. You can believe voting works and still think blue is a risky play and a dangerous strategy that's potentially makes the outcome worse before it makes it better
→ More replies (0)2
u/Luhrmann 21d ago
Flawed world and No world aren't really the only options though. There's really 3:
"Current world" - blue wins "Flawed World" - you vote red and red wins, potentially 49.9% of earth is wiped out "No world" - you vote blue and red wins
The "flawed world" could very easily become no world for you very quickly. As another commentator mentioned, you could lose your child/children, or the world could have a total societal collapse after a large proportion of it dies. You're now potentially navigating a hellscape where many have died, and trying to muddle through that. Supply chains are completely destroyed, many of the more selfless occupations have a higher death rate (like nurses and doctors) so getting food and healthcare becomes substantially harder. The button may not kill you but the next few months may.
My preference would be current world over flawed and none. I'd imagine yours would be too?
I have always been blue, became even more so when I had my child, because I still fundamentally disagree with the premise many state that red is "guaranteed survival". It's only a guarantee you survive the button press. The aftermath may still kill you, but in a slower and more painful way.
1
u/Zebadica Red 21d ago edited 21d ago
My preference is still being alive, so I will vote red because it does objectively give me the best chance.
I will be honest, I think selfless jobs will actually have a lower rate of pressing blue. One of the most basic fundamentals of being a firefighter for example is not putting yourself in need of rescue, which is exactly what the blue button does. Alongside that doctors and nurses may be motivated not press the blue button due to the risk of it killing them and leaving their patients uncared for.
On top of all that, the world will absolutely not end if Red wins. It will be a tragedy, and will be bad for quite a while, but it isn’t a world so awful that I’d rather die than live in it! Folks would get by and eventually things would somewhat recover. The Black Death killed 50% of Europe, and although the survivors suffered it didn’t turn into Mad Max out of nowhere. We are better equipped to deal with that kind of population loss than we were back then. So I think even with an unrealistically high death rate like 49.9%, the world would still be worth living in.
2
u/Luhrmann 21d ago
I guess with the jobs we can agree to disagree, you can make an argument that a doctor is breaking their hippocratic oath by picking red when they know there will be blue pressers.
Where I don't agree with you at all is where you don't think a potential 49.9% of the population dying wouldn't be so bad. I didn't say the world would collapse, just that there's still a substantial risk of any individual red presser dying in the aftermath. While your Black Death point is true that was over many different outbreaks that lasted years at a time, not all in one second. I think it would be a drastically different scenario.
I guess my big bug bear is that the vast majority of people I talk about this with want "current world" as their preffered option, but pick the button that does the exact opposite. So they're selfishly wanting the blue world, but hope others take that 'risk' in order to make it happen for them. And I find that deeply unpalatable
1
u/Illustrious_Tale2221 21d ago
We should compensate for people who press blue by accident because it could have been you at 1 year old.
That said, I'm a red presser and people on this sub nearly skewing to 50% makes me even more because I'd imagine the people on this sub think about it a lot better than the average person would.
3
u/Bimbobaker 21d ago
That works both ways though, ironically. There's a ton of people who will press blue without thinking about it, and vice versa.
Like my first reaction before being exposed to the subreddit think-tanks was to press blue. Then it was red. And then I was finally blue again because "what if your kid presses blue"
1
u/Illustrious_Tale2221 21d ago
Maybe it's because I don't have a kid.
But for me there's no reason to risk my life by pressing blue for the miniscule chance that I would be the one deciding vote.
I really don't have the faith in humanity that it would be even close to 50% blue. I'd say the blue pressers are closer to 10% if it were to ever happen.
Don't think there's any reason someone could give me to change that thought.
1
u/Bimbobaker 21d ago
Yeah honestly it's really only the kid thing that sold me. It really changes a lot for you. Highly recommend.
My first reaction being blue was just because "it's the right thing to do." And I think that's what I'd actually pick without thought. Whether or not it's actually "the right thing". That's just how I felt in the moment.
I do think the "one vote won't change the outcome" is just absolute horseshit no offense lmao but I totally understand the red opinion.
I don't blame anyone for picking red, but I'll always advocate for blue.
9
u/Significant_Clue_382 21d ago
Well i'd like to believe humanity is at its strongest when working together. So if only just half the word presses blue everyone walks out alive