“Kill the first 100 infants you see.”
Good enough? (I don’t know the names of 100 infants, and they’re probably not in the phone book either).
You don’t think he’ll murder you out of hand for that bit of smartassey?
I was thinking about cancer patients, too, to put them out of their misery - I have a couple of friends whose parents are suffering, and I mean really suffering, from cancer and you can just see the quiet desperation in their eyes that wishes it would be resolved one way or another. But being skewered with Gungnir doesn’t really seem less painful…the OP did not say if Odin would kill the 100 people the same way, however.
The public-figure thing is so the Mods don’t close the thread and smack people for wishing death on the likes of Nancy Grace. Also, from Odin’s POV, it serves to make your choice harder; you know a lot of people would just go to Wikipedia and choose Republican leaders, Democratic leaders, etc, or other famous types they dislike.
Can we kill and revive Nancy Grace 10,000 times? Note: she is not revived after the 10,000th kill, unless we can arrange it that she remembers being killed 10,000 times.
That doesn’t mean I would willingly kill them given the opportunity.
Of course, this begins to get into a grey area that’s been discussed on this board a few times. If someone says ‘do Y or I kill X’ and I don’t do Y, am I culpable for X’s death?
Is the twist if you pick the list of 100 you end up on someone else’s 100 list?
I wouldn’t be killing them. I wouldn’t willingly kill them myself, but a god is a different thing. I don’t even have to get my hands dirty. Mrs. Donlin, you are so first on my list, you evil witch of a fight grade teacher, you. Of course you might already be dead.
But if you don’t pick, you are culpable for 10,000 people. Oh, I know it’s like the train switch analogy - if you don’t do anything, you haven’t killed 10,000 people, just let them be killed. If you do, you have directly caused the deaths of 100 people.
I say, if Odin is that hell-bent on destruction then it is rather incumbent on you to lessen the death toll, if you can, as well as pick people that are more deserving of it.
It depends…who is playing?
Yes, go with the 100. Unfortunately the natural inclination to go with some “list of the evil/useless” is barred by the OP, but I’d have no problem going entirely random if imagination failed. Likely, given the chance, I’d browse local papers for murder/rape/drug dealing/domestic violence suspects. Not all guilty by any means, but better some criteria than none. For me the moral question would be whether to include the 3-5 people I know personally who fall into those categories. I’d like to, but that would change the killings from being a regrettable byproduct of saving 9,900 lives to an act of personal vengeance.
Would it be permissible to tell him to go to the nearest arena, and, say, take the first 100 people in the skyboxes/box seats/bleachers? That way I reduce the death toll by 99%, and I’m not really picking out any individuals.
I’m going to say kill the 10,000. Presumably this would be the more “boring” choice for Odin as he doesn’t get the satisfaction out of seeing me squirm over which people I have to kill.
Hopefully, this would discourage him from playing stupid fuck head games in the future.
Also, The Prime Directive.
What I’m wrestling with is that it would be my reflex to deny incumbency or obligation. This asshole just showed up and thrust it on me; I don’t have to accept it.
Of course, that’s just the general case. This specific situation makes it harder to deny the obligation. I might end up killing the 100, but I don’t think I could be as blase about it as everyone else is.
Post #16 Czarcasm…
The only reason I didn’t make it more definite is that I thought it would sound all internet tough guy… when really what I was/am thinking is that after giving the All Father 99 names I’m pretty sure I’d be a wreck and would trade myself for #100 to a) avoid another name and b) because I’m not sure I could live with myself afterwards.
Thanks Moonlitherial.
Yes, assuming we’re not fighting Skald’s hypothetical then I cannot see an option other than choosing the hundred (it’s logical and pragmatic) but the burden… I wouldn’t be me afterwards.
God gad man, number 100 is Skald!
Oh, shit.
10,000. Causing innocent death is always wrong.
Of course, living with myself after that would be hell.
Not unless I’m getting to name him twice. 
Because, honestly, if Odin Allfather turns up and says he’s chosen me as his scourge in some Skald’s-fingerprints-all-over-it hideous mind-game dilemma then who do you think is going to be #1?
And while **Skald **may actually have been entirely innocent of having set Old Shifty One-eye on his murderous rampage I trust he’ll understand the degree of suspicion that would point in his direction.
(Although I was also assuming that onlne handles weren’t sufficient to meet the OP). 
That might not be a Bad Idea, given the flaming/flying monkeys or ferrets or whatever the hell they are…Hell, maybe they are flying smurfs. That would explain a lot.
This is a variant of the Trolley Problem. In brief, you see a trolley rolling down the tracks about to hit and kill five people. You can throw a switch which will divert it onto another set of tracks where it will hit and kill only one person. Differing moral viewpoints argue for minimizing deaths vs. non-involvement in any deaths.
Wikipedia has a nice write-up on the topic. Or as nice as it can be when discussing running people over with a trolley…
But you’re causing innocent death, whether you like it or not, by your inaction. Pick a hundred random names. I’d live fine with myself knowing I saved 9,900 people. This is not even close to a moral dilemma from my perspective.