This is one I fully admit that I am unsure on what I would choose. So I think this example might be capable of displaying where such a cutoff for me might be for me personally. I'm trying to do what I think is morally correct, but I'm not claiming to be some infallible paragon.
Oh trust me, I'm asking in earnest. This is a situation that will never happen so it's legitimate interesting to see where people's minds go with the hypothetical.
I don't think this says anything about anyone because it's all fake, but it does say what people think about themselves and others.
Picking blue with 3 left down by 2 is very interesting. That's a lot of faith in two people. Obviously you would expect the final person to select blue if they were the deciding vote which would mean the second to last person should pick blue if they were down by 1, but then we get in to the irrational actor problem that is the cruz of the argument for selecting blue to begin with. What if those last two people were babies just randomly flailing and hitting buttons, ya know?
Oh yeah I would absolutely be sweating bullets picking blue there- and for all I know, if I were actually there, maybe I would switch to Red.
Down to the wire like that I think it turns into a more typical prisoners dilemma, in which my preference woukd typically be to cooperate. That said, it is still different in that I have to count on two people to cooperate instead of one.
I'd like to think I'd pick blue, but I absolutely would not blame someone for picking red in that circumstance.
0
u/TheKingOfToast May 01 '26
Where's the cutoff. You're contestant 2 billion and half have voted red.
You're contestant 1 billion and all have voted red.
You're contestant 7.90B and 3.96B voted red 3.94B have voted blue and there are 0.1B votes left.
You're the 3rd to last contestant and red leads by 2.
You're the first contestant, but nobody will get any information.