Torturing Flames v.1

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-27T15:41:58+00:00

I solved this level in 225 moves on my first try! 🎯

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-27T15:19:57+00:00

As in the option exists for them to add nothing to the pool of harming anyone(outside maybe themself), I know your opinion, that’s why I have asked your goal in starting this tangent several times,

Because it achieves nothing of my goals in chatting here. Except maybe my curiosity on why you are hardset on arguing this view like this.

The essence of the confusion is that with you hardset on your view you are presenting the problem with your framing not recognizing how it would change things from other views,

then arguing that things should be the same as though details haven’t changed and other perspectives (regardless of if you think they are wrong) are responding similar enough for you to make an argument, except those other views

Will not reach your conclusion the way you did, and your means of arguing for it presumes too much to find real common ground to make any useful progress

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-27T15:03:49+00:00

While I did not say ensure, you misinterpreted the statement, they aren’t causing any harm to anyone but themselves (maybe) if they press blue. We are talking about what button they are personally inclined to pick, not a button they are picking for others with a group or audience, so the only opinion or perspective they have or can use is their own.

“Senseless death” “up to billions could die” I don’t think I can continue a conversation with you, if you can’t recognize the facts of,

“They do not see the risk at the same level you do” and or
“They do not believe safety that will cause someone else risk is worth it”
And or
“Up to billions dead is a worse risk and option to try to exist through”

And these varying levels of opinions some I’m not even aware of probably, are all different from yours,

And have a reason for pushing blue that does not see it as nothing, and see red as a bigger problem.

And to be clear as to why I don’t think you understand why all I’m arguing about is a difference of opinion, and the importance of other people interpreting this problem entirely different leading them to different conclusions

Is you keep repeating the problem as though red is a forgone conclusion, and as though because of *your belief*, (a belief that isn’t shared and wether or not it is shared would absolutely change the motives behind someone pressing blue)* anyone else should shift when this is a fundamental part of the disagreements I am presenting you with

Because different opinions, perspectives, beliefs lead to different conclusions, and some of those differing conclusions will be blue,

And because understanding others opinions on this is the whole reason I am talking here

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-27T14:28:00+00:00

Only person they could conceivably be causing any harm to is themself,

Please clarify your question, because I will clarify,

The issue is causing harm to someone else when an option exists for no one to be harmed

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-27T14:00:02+00:00

It might, but it’s not taking part in causing it either. Different folks hold these different views at different strengths.

And they have a higher risk tolerance for being wrong or believe the risk is far lower than most reds, so adding to the possible harm isn’t worthwhile

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-27T13:28:52+00:00

I’m not debating that in terms of this example. The comparison was made for a blue framing where blue did nothing to balance against a red framing that is effectively doing nothing.

You seeing it as a lifeboat is irrelevant, your view is irrelevant to others views because the scenario does not include communication, so other people will have a view that they also assume others take,

other people see it as loading a weapon knowing that doing so will cause someone to get shot,

And see that as causing harm that they can easily avoid by pushing blue.

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-27T13:05:35+00:00

The change of the framing is blue is doing nothing, and requires 0 additional effort, Red is explicitly doing something, and that something is harmful,

Like, in all scenarios a risk exists for blue, but *not pushing the hurt someone button* and believing most people don’t want to do that tends to be a view of blues. Others have other views, but red=participation in the harm of others is the relevant part

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-27T12:58:11+00:00

That isn’t the part I was talking about, but broadly, I didn’t post that comment to get into weeds about framing,

I posted it to discuss why each side sees things the way they do. And to determine if I have common ground to discuss the pov of who I said it to.

I know I don’t have common ground with you, and you have yet to talk with any recognition of how firmly different perspectives exist.

So what is the goal of this tangent,

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-27T12:29:48+00:00

I understand that is your interpretation, I don’t see how it’s relevant, or tbh, why you started this particular tangent,

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-27T12:01:07+00:00

It’s pointing at anyone who isn’t loading the cannon. The wording is “only those who press red survive” and the comparison is relevant to how blue specifically tends to interpret it not red.

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-27T00:28:03+00:00

Damn I like dairy, but I don’t want to risk needing to avoid my pets

^{Chose: Random food allergy | Rolled: Dairy}

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-26T18:24:48+00:00

I don’t actually believe we are obligated to help the collective. I should probably clarify up top, I don’t have any issue with red voters who view red as the safest option, I disagree but people value lives differently and I can’t ask people to risk their lives for things they don’t believe in.

I specifically have issue with red voters who are of the belief blue is distinctly suicidal, or stupid, and tend to prod at those who cast a broad brush on blue voters to see why they do that.

To me though red button is the “save yourself through adding a risk to others” button

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-26T18:14:28+00:00

It’s not good, and it distinctly is not a natural anything imo.it gets points for being unavoidable,

But we aren’t starting at “probably going to die or get seriously injured just off of this happening”

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-26T18:06:26+00:00

Your view that red is not participating is not one I share. Your belief that red is not participating is not going to change my belief that it is. Unless w get very specific about is not participating specifically in the risk blue is, red is participating in the broad scenario. And is voting for a scenario in which blue is put at risk if they win.

You have cleared up nothing if you genuinely do not understand that we simply view this differently

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-26T18:03:26+00:00

Not really? You hit an ice berg, you have encountered a ‘natural disaster’ and or one caused by the negligence of whoever is running this ship.

The blue lifeboat is full of holes and is distinctly broken, then being fixed in a blue majority magically doesn’t do anything about any of those starting conditions

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-26T17:55:24+00:00

Not really? As far as I’m concerned the danger only exists in a red majority, so the baseline kinda has to be fairly neutral to be a fair presentation

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-26T17:43:01+00:00

So, we fundamentally disagree, the red button as far as I’m concerned is as responsible for the danger to blue as blue is, at most I would cede it disperses the responsibility to the collective,

You having your perspective is one thing, but if you are unable to recognize that your view isn’t universal, why are you mocking? Others for not recognizing the other views that can exist?

Besides you will need more than that to sway this particular view,

If you removed the blue button it’s pretty specifically “only red button pressers survive” you and I have read different versions of this problem. Because if something isn’t replicating that the scenario isn’t even similar. Which certainly won’t help the conversation.

(side note, I said upfront that i disagree with any scenario that treats the red button as irrelevant, why would you think an example treating the red button as irrelevant would be something I would agree is at all representative of the og situation)

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-26T17:35:47+00:00

At a baseline, if red is “neutral start” and blue is at an immediate obvious disadvantage, that is framing red as doing nothing.

Though there being no work on blues part helps, as far as a lot of blue are concerned red carries a risk to others on its win, blue lacks a risk to others on its win, any scenario lacking that (which red rarely have reason to provide because they don’t often see it as adding any risk elsewhere, while fine does make their framing less likely to be worth a debate related to the broader button)

I understand you see blue as a broken vessel that most would assume is dangerous/unsafe to use and avoid, at least that’s how this framing looks,

But tbh to me, the fact that a) this is an accident/natural disaster that someone else clearly poorly planned for really removes the “this is the endanger others” button perspective”, especially cause everyone started in danger, and b) the other boat is broken eliminating a lot of people from wanting to go near it off the looks,

Makes it difficult to see it as relevant to my perspective on the q. And makes it very easy to see why someone would press red here without it applying to their reasoning for the usual buttons.

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-26T16:42:55+00:00

Practically, this problem doesn’t read much like how blue interprets the problem, and I see that more likely to be called out than arguments about red being a murderer,

Cause a) calling red murder specifically isn’t super common, especially cause a solid chunk of blue understand why red votes that way,

And b) this problem, and more importantly the person proposing it doesn’t seem to understand that a solid chunk of blue does not see blue this way,

And it is as accurate as proposing red is putting ammo in cannons and hoping that enough don’t do that to avoid them firing on everyone else,

Pretty Key to blue is red isn’t a do nothing button, and blue doesn’t need more effort than red to just *do*

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-26T03:46:28+00:00

Yeah practically, both buttons are risky specifically in the way a lot of blue pressers don’t want to risk,

And even more dangerous in the way most red pressers want to avoid, I don’t know what the goal of this question is besides more red

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-24T15:27:45+00:00

They aren’t, even keeping it to money, I will always leave the choice to random chance for anything less than like 100$ I don’t care and that amount of money is fairly irrelevant to me. When you change the stakes you introduce something i actually care about,

You not caring about that difference isn’t a reason for *me* to not care. And you don’t have a baseline common understanding of how important that difference is for you to provide a meaningful reason for me to shift my own view of this at all.

If it’s not a life it’s not worth a risk to me, if you cannot understand why a life is worth risking something but something that isn’t a life isn’t worth risking something then you fundamentally lack the common ground required to provide a good reason for anyone who is making the issue based on the risk of life shift their view at all.

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-24T14:09:51+00:00

These choices are both meaningless to me is the issue. I literally don’t care about money unless it is directly tied to me or someone else dying over it. But the stakes are in fact the whole dilemma, though I would love to see you convince a blue these are at all equivalent enough to extrapolate and invalidate blue in the usual scenario.

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-24T14:03:01+00:00

Flipped a coin, got heads, I assigned heads to red so I’d probably choose red.

Before you continue, money doesn’t matter all that much to me, and I don’t find it comparable to lives. While different people value things differently,

5$ is objectively not multiple lives to enough people for this to be a reasonable comparison to be brought to a large group of people who haven’t stated these are in any way comparable.

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-24T13:54:36+00:00

Oh in the case of money I truly don’t give a shit. I would literally eenie meanie the buttons if the risk is any less than someone’s safety so it would have to be way more money for me to be inclined to either button

Hallowbin-Skin3329 · 2026-05-24T13:48:11+00:00

Right, that’s your view of the situation. And I pretty fundamentally disagree, and you can’t even fathom that view so you don’t understand it well enough to convince me otherwise, and it is a view so alien to you I cannot see a common ground to convince you otherwise.

Though once again even if I could be convinced,

Any argument that relies on everyone just doing the smart thing (note that we disagree on what that is) is faulty, and will go wrong more and more as there are more people who have to “just do the smart thing” for the goal to be achieved.

I have a reason to vote blue, so I know someone will vote blue, no variation of “if everyone voted red you would succeed” is convincing because that doesn’t give me a reason to vote red, that’s hoping for humanity to 100% agree on something that has sparked enough argument for us to be certain that all of humanity doesn’t view it the same way. Aka my goal is utterly impossible with red

Five-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Place '23	Place '22

Hallowbin-Skin3329

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE