Which is more important- decreasing world suck, or increasing world awesome?

[Matthew Strong]

I'm fairley sure that this discussion has taken place before, but I'm curious about other people's views, and I'm, currently trying to get my priorities straight. Naturally, Ieventually came to this predicament. This isn't incredibly important, but still...

[Liz Kim]

agreeeeeeeee

[Matija Jinks]

Decreasing world suck, obviously. I'd rather feel mildly awesome and have less people starving to death in third world countries than feel entirely awesome and have loads of people dying.

[Molly Leone]

Decreasing world suck because having less suck is awesome, which makes increasing awesome a byproduct of decreasing world suck.

[Contradiction]

The thing about awesome is that it doesn't negate suck. So I'd have to go with decreasing suck.

[Errka]

I imagine that suck and awesome are opposites so they would work like yin and yang. There will always be suck within the awesome and awesome within the suck >_>.... The two amounts will always find a way to balance themselves back out.

[Kat Doherty]

if you decrease world suck it will in turn increase world awesome