I once read about an experiment where a guy set up a booth with a jar labeled
"Free money take as much as you want, no questions asked"
While the guy was standing there, very few people took any money, or if they did, they only took like $1-$5, true to the phrase, he didn't say anything to them. The people couldn't get past the thought of there being a catch/ didn't want to look greedy/ ext
Then he repeated the experiment with only the booth and nobody attending it, in this instance, the money was gone almost immediately.
OT: I voted +1. I like to believe the majority of people care about the majority when the well being of the majority is considered.
I may be a bit more ruthless if it came down to a 1vs1 or small company type scenario, depending on how well off I am doing myself and how much I need those extra Internets.
Well lets see, Equality at all costs seems to be the flavour of the month and since some people have already voted for 3 internets the only way to ensure we all get an equal number of internets is to vote for 3 so that everyone gets none at all.
It's only reasonable, really. Assuming others follow similar logic, and considering that the "perfect payout" situation, where the most internets is given out is a 10/90% split, the 3 internets votes generate only 1 internets to 3 generated by 1 internets votes. As such, odds of acquiring internets is tripled when selecting the 1 internets choice.
Taking this Experiment more serously than it probably deserves, I chose +1. Judging the morals of my action by what would happen if everyone else acted the same, +1 for everyone is obviously better than nothing for anyone. Also, the overall amount of internets given away is is disproportionally stacked against the +3 option, since it would allow for 120 (100 +20) in best case, but 0 (100 -100)at min.
3 because there's no actual risk or need involved. Further, once enough people vote my greed becomes inconsequential. My vote on its own actually changes very little. Now this attitude as a whole may be a problem, however my vote alone does not promote this attitude. My post might but it seems unlikely given people will probably vote then read posts.
What's an "internets" and why would I want 1 or 3 of them? For all I know you could be talking about explosive vomiting fits. More of something isn't necessarily better, and don't relly know what I'm getting myself into.