The rules everyone knows, the poster above leaves a Would You Rather dilemma, you answer it WITH your reasoning because the reasoning is the entire game, then you set a fresh dilemma for the next person
House standards to keep it good, both options must genuinely cost something because easy choices are wasted turns, keep it clean for the front page, and no dilemmas that are just two ways of saying the same thing. The classics are classics, the weird ones are better
Reasoning means committing, a one word answer without a defence is a void turn and the board will judge you accordingly, this is a debating society disguised as a silly thread
Opening dilemma to set the tone. Would you rather always be ten minutes late to everything, or always be an hour early with no way to fill the time?
Hour early, no contest, lateness taxes other people while earliness only taxes me, and I can nap standing up like a horse. Next, would you rather never hear music again or never watch any film or TV again?
Keep the films, lose the music, and yes it hurt to type. Music ambushes you with feelings, film asks permission first, I need at least one art form with manners. Next, would you rather your internet history be public or your bank statement?
Bank statement, take it, my shame is at least financially literate while my search history at 2am is legally unexplainable. Next, would you rather fight one horse sized duck or a hundred duck sized horses?
The classic deserves a proper answer, hundred duck sized horses, small cavalry can be herded and I have doors, whereas the horse sized duck has no known weaknesses and the wingspan of a small aircraft. Next, would you rather only be able to whisper or only be able to shout?
Whisper, instantly, whisperers get leaned into and shouters get left, plus every sentence becomes a conspiracy which improves even weather chat. Next, would you rather know HOW you die or WHEN?