Serial loser referring to someone in third place with a sub par team, an assist record, the most POTM awards, and when he could have had 30 assists with better finishers is a take
WHAT IS GOING ON?
How can a serial loser this season beat a man who has driven Arsenal to our first League title in 22 years?
This is complete madness.
🚨 #GIVEAWAY! 🚨
Rory McIlroy won the year's first major and with the 2nd Major of the year teeing off tomorrow, we are giving away this Lamont Mann built Rory McIlroy Torched Spider Putter to 1 lucky golfer!
To enter:
⛳ Comment Your Current Putter
⛳ Tag 3 Friends in Your Comment
⛳ Like & Share Post + Follow @2ndSwingGolf
*Will choose one random winner among all entries
*Will announce winner next week
*Must submit entry by this Sunday
Disclaimer: This contest is in no way affiliated with Rory McIlroy nor the PGA Championship. 2nd Swing Contest Rules Apply.
Everyone on earth takes a private vote by pressing a red or blue button. If more than 50% of people press the blue button, everyone survives. If less than 50% of people press the blue button, only people who pressed the red button survive. Which button would you press? BE HONEST.
@zainosaurus Hahaha sure I’ll let you know later, but my whole point is that that variable doesn’t matter to math? because each press doesn’t rely on the others statistically, hence my all math no morals statement, I’m not arguing morals here
@zainosaurus That’s not how math works though, because A and B are not linear, A is unaffected by B, but B is affected by A creating scenario C and D, C everyone lives, D people who chose B die. As only outcome is C everyone lives, because A is independent. Math says A
@zainosaurus There is only the red button, you press you live, but if you don’t press and greater than 50% of people don’t press everyone lives. If you didn’t press and over 50% of the press, you die. Now because it’s an action verse inaction society would flip towards the action side,
@zainosaurus I think the problem with our discussion is I’m not arguing “winning” I’m arguing the mathematics of the choice, where as you’re arguing the moral victory in each choice and saving the most people. The question is the collective vs the individual but I’m just here for math
@zainosaurus Yes yes, but my whole point isn’t the morality of picking each button, it’s that one button is mathematically the better option for everyone. The fact that you argue against math is the premise of morality all in itself but the question loses to math, therefore a flawed question
@zainosaurus No no no, because math doesn’t care about the previous answer, math only cares about your answer. So 100% survival on red, blue would create like a 55%~ survival rate cause you’d have to do factors for each time someone is clicking the button