If you could "delete" one person...

Recommended Videos

Nouw

New member
Mar 18, 2009
15,615
0
0
So many people to choose... but really I'd pick someone who if was erased would have the biggest effect on Reality TV!
 

2fish

New member
Sep 10, 2008
1,930
0
0
I would delete the pope just to see how the world wold respond. One night pope goes to bed, next day pope is MIA with no way he could have left the room without anyone seeing him. Reality tv is a close second.
 

Shadow-Phoenix

New member
Mar 22, 2010
2,289
0
0
ThatLankyBastard said:
ThePoodonkis said:
ZoMaster101 said:
katsumoto03 said:
wait why dopes this link keep going to me, do you want to delete me? or does this link just go to whomever clicks on it?
The link goes directly to one's own profile. Just a clever use of the URL function.
Really? Damn... I thought it went specifically to MY profile...
I thought the first thing i clicked on that XD. I would probably have myself deleted.
 

wulfy42

New member
Jan 29, 2009
771
0
0
Wow two people already said Adam. That was my first instinctive answer as well.

Since we don't know if there really was an Adam, I guess a more realistic answer would be good.

I can't think of a single person I could delete that would prevent the fall of Rome as it was kinda a very long death spiral. Any large historical figures would probably have to many large implications throughout history and quite often they might be more negative then what originally happened. I heard once that if WWII didn't happen we might be increadibly overpopulated by now for instance.

So I would probably look up and find a pedophile that had confessed to molesting tons of children (or a church member I guess), find the one that harmed the most lives possible and delete them. It would be a small change but a completely positive one.

That or if I could figure out who first started to bring slaves into the U.S. (I know slavery was in other parts of the world, and it developed from indentured servitude...but someone had to start importing slaves from africa) and delete them.

Of course that would probably wipe out all the African american's in our country that exist right now...so that really wouldn't work either (just don't like the idea of slavery and think it's a horrible part of this countries history), so well.....if everyone would still be born that is currently alive I'd do that....otherwise I'd just go with my first choice to play it safe.
 

Wolfenbarg

Terrible Person
Oct 18, 2010
682
0
0
Chairman Mao. If you have to delete someone from history, why not the largest mass murderer in human history?
 

Kevonovitch

New member
Apr 15, 2009
512
0
0
Jezzascmezza said:
Hitler I guess.
He is probably one of the most evil human beings to ever live, so I guess getting rid of him would be a good thing.
what? de-create the guy that brought the world out of the great depression, when nothing was working, and nobody had any functional plans? skipping the evil, there's quite alot of good that he did that still reflects in the world today, even his evil had results that changed the world for the better, that, probably woulden't have, if not then, but much much later.

but back to being on topic....just one? dude, c'mon, i need ATLEAST 20 here :/ (ps: what's with all the hate on hitler? jeeze :/ slow night for trolling or what? >_>)
 

enriel

New member
Oct 20, 2009
187
0
0
Sakuo. Sakujo. Sakujo. Sakujo. Sakujo. Sakujo.

Ha, I suck.

I would delete...somebody none of you know. What a prick.
 
Feb 19, 2010
964
0
0
katsumoto03 said:
ooh, how dilightful

i would delete jack thompson. why does he exist? i dont know
toriver said:
It would be very interesting to say Hitler, thereby proving Godwin's Law, but I feel that the legacy of World War II is a mixed bag, as horrible as the Holocaust was. Instead, I am going to go with someone involved with WWII who is often overlooked as someone to "erase" in these kinds of questions.

Josef Stalin

When Lenin died, it was quite a close call between Stalin and Trotsky over who would be his successor. The Soviet Union was not a totalitarian regime at the time. Stalin took it in that direction, and it is not inevitable that Trotsky would have done the same. Yes, under Stalin's regime the Soviet Union experienced a great amount of economic growth, but at a tremendous cost that ended up being larger than the amount that died under Nazi rule in Germany. While Stalin's gulags were more for political than ethnic prisoners, it was pretty much for anyone whom he had any sort of slight problem with. Further, it was the Stalinist Soviet Union that really started the whole "Red Scare" in the U.S. that led to the Cold War and the branding of Communism as inevitably leading to such totalitarian regimes. The Cold War itself was really a shameful period in the foreign policies of both the U.S. and Russia/U.S.S.R., that I am sure both would take back in a heartbeat. Under Stalin, the Soviets did win WWII, but then placed the entirety of Eastern Europe under their harsh sphere of influence, dragging the region's growth to a stunted pace as compared to that of Western Europe and North America. Really, anything Stalin touched turned to crud. And I feel the Soviets and the Allies could have still won the war under Trotsky, even if they avoided going totalitarian. History would have looked a lot different. Whether that would be for the better or worse is unknown, but it would be hard to be worse than what Stalin did to the U.S.S.R. So that's who I would "erase" from history.
then again, without the russain famine and the trading with the nazis, mr S. would not have made a massive army from all the money made, we would be having american propaganda being shoved down our throats, and possibly in aa nuclear war.
 

AvsJoe

Elite Member
May 28, 2009
9,055
0
41
Sir Archibald Butt, a long-forgotten important person with a very ridiculous name. The only thing I know about him was that he was aboard the Titanic when it decided to take an unscheduled bath. I would delete him from history because he shares his given name with my surname and I got "verbally abused" pretty badly for it when we read about him in Grade 3. I don't care what he did to earn his knighthood, I want him gone from history forever!
 

Toriver

Lvl 20 Hedgehog Wizard
Jan 25, 2010
1,364
0
0
NAHTZEE said:
katsumoto03 said:
ooh, how dilightful

i would delete jack thompson. why does he exist? i dont know
toriver said:
It would be very interesting to say Hitler, thereby proving Godwin's Law, but I feel that the legacy of World War II is a mixed bag, as horrible as the Holocaust was. Instead, I am going to go with someone involved with WWII who is often overlooked as someone to "erase" in these kinds of questions.

Josef Stalin

When Lenin died, it was quite a close call between Stalin and Trotsky over who would be his successor. The Soviet Union was not a totalitarian regime at the time. Stalin took it in that direction, and it is not inevitable that Trotsky would have done the same. Yes, under Stalin's regime the Soviet Union experienced a great amount of economic growth, but at a tremendous cost that ended up being larger than the amount that died under Nazi rule in Germany. While Stalin's gulags were more for political than ethnic prisoners, it was pretty much for anyone whom he had any sort of slight problem with. Further, it was the Stalinist Soviet Union that really started the whole "Red Scare" in the U.S. that led to the Cold War and the branding of Communism as inevitably leading to such totalitarian regimes. The Cold War itself was really a shameful period in the foreign policies of both the U.S. and Russia/U.S.S.R., that I am sure both would take back in a heartbeat. Under Stalin, the Soviets did win WWII, but then placed the entirety of Eastern Europe under their harsh sphere of influence, dragging the region's growth to a stunted pace as compared to that of Western Europe and North America. Really, anything Stalin touched turned to crud. And I feel the Soviets and the Allies could have still won the war under Trotsky, even if they avoided going totalitarian. History would have looked a lot different. Whether that would be for the better or worse is unknown, but it would be hard to be worse than what Stalin did to the U.S.S.R. So that's who I would "erase" from history.
then again, without the russain famine and the trading with the nazis, mr S. would not have made a massive army from all the money made, we would be having american propaganda being shoved down our throats, and possibly in aa nuclear war.
That would be assuming the US would try to take over the world in the absence of a counter-balancing superpower. Funny, in the 20 years since the US has become the sole world superpower in its own right, I haven't exactly seen that happening. About the nuclear thing, I think what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was quite the effective deterrent to the US pulling out the nukes again unless some other nation used them first. I don't see your scenario happening.
 

CarpathianMuffin

Space. Lance.
Jun 7, 2010
1,810
0
0
This girl who sits behind me in my psychology class who's not only incredibly dense, but loud. Bad combination that makes her a prime candidate for deletion.