Poll: Ethical Dilemmia

[Julianking93]

but the oldest may have already given enough to soceity, by this argument most of you are taking is that Madonna is worth less then Spears...

Thats why I choose button 3! A newborn-10 year old hasn't done shit for society

 

[LilGherkin]

Button 3. The old man has contributed to society already and worked hard to get where he is. The infant has yet to do anything and for all we know he won't do anything worth wile at all.

 

[KingPiccolOwned]

This is a tough one. But I have to do this one logically. The old person is least likely to contribute to society in terms of real, hard labor. The kid could grow up and be awesome. And the middle person is already contributing.

I would have to agree with this one. Also if you happen to believe in an afterlife the old person is the one most deserving of it good or bad.

 

[sky14kemea]

if i dont choose, do i die instead?

because im fine with that

but if its 'i dont choose and they all die' then i'd have to go with the old person because he's lived his life, but the 25 year old and the 10 year old still have many things to experience

 

[ElephantGuts]

Tough one. Either 1 or 3.

Actually, 3, just to help control overpopulation. Who knows how many kids that kid will go on to have.

 

[teisjm]

you do not have a "i would not play" option.

because i would not play.

It's called not voting. very simple.

As for the question itself: is the 25-35 old by chance a hot female? is the 50-60 year old a (g)milf? (if anyone starts talking bout hot 0-10 year olds i'll make a button specially for them and press it)

Jokes aside I would prolly go with the 50-60 year old, unless choosing only myself is an avalible option.

My logic would be that i assume most people would wanna do this, and therefore there's a chance that the old person would as well.
They would prolly also cause less mourning cause (at least for 60) they we're clsoer to an age where death is more thought of than with younger people.

 

[Yegargeburble]

I would probably kill all of them, just in case they had buttons of their own to push.

Even if they didn't, I want to make sure I survive.

 

[Naeo]

The oldest one.

The young kid...I don't know if I could do it. They still have almost their whole life to live, forgive the corny sentiment.

The middle-aged one would almost definitely not want to die at all.

The oldest would be at the end of their life and more likely to not be scared of death.

 

[TheLastCylon]

Depends on how they die. If the death was nice and peaceful (a la Soylent Green) than of course I would kill the old person, they deserve a nice death. If the death was long and painful, most likely I would choose the 25-30 year old specifically because they would probably be the strongest and most resistant to pain.

 

[War Penguin]

It would be a tough choice but in the end I would choose button one.
They lived the most of life and contributed their work.
Man... I feel so depressingly evil. And not like the type of evil where you have seemingly endless power.

 

[USSR]

I'd hit button 4.

Button 4 unleashes a panda that devours them all, and gives you a cookie afterwards.

 

[Skeleon]

Ah, crap, should've read the OP completely before voting.
I thought the poll was which one would I save.
If I could vote again, I'd choose button 1.

 

[Hazy]

Button 1

The old person certainly doesn't deserve to die, but they aren't contributing to society anymore. The middle person is actively working. The baby may not yet be working but they could grow up to be awesome, maybe help us colonize mars or some shit like that. Lots of potential in young people.

I agree with this.

 

[Shock and Awe]

I hate every option, but I think 1 is the easiest option, they have lived a full life, the other two still have a full life ahead of them.

 

[Srkkl]

The child. I've been saying to put all 2 year olds into a facility until they are 11. because the span from 2-10 they are the most annoying. When they are babies they are at least cute when they are crying and pooping but I hate toddlers because they cry, poop, and are ugly as fuck.

 

[Motti]

I'd just mash all of them at once and let luck decide who dies first.

 

[deathstrikesquirrel]

I'd press 1 and use the other two as meat shields or the kid to check for traps.

 

[Kinguendo]

you do not have a "i would not play" option.

because i would not play.

If you dont play then everyone incuding yourself dies, are you a part of some crazy suicide pact?

he gets off on people playing his game, if you play hes happy, if you dont hes unhappy.

Whats wrong with making people happy? I think I would rather save 3 lives and make someone happy than throw away 4 lives for someones unhappiness.

 

[Xender90]

I would say button one, because the old person has the least amount of time to live. In other words if you killed the kid then you are taking away +- 80 years if you killed the older person you would be taking away 20 years.

 

[DarkFenix]

i'd push 3

why?

the retired person served us and put in their time thus they should get to enjoy what they worked for

the middle aged person has had more resources spent on them and are of working age thus being more useful

the kid would go because they have no use to society as of yet, we are over populated as is thus need less kids around, they consume resources without giving much back. Lastly if they are from this generation of "me me me me me" then I'm most def pushing that buttona few times.