Whole-class discussions in mathematics are envisioned as spaces for the sharing of ideas and making connections among them. We pursue how Palestinian/Arab Israeli teachers consider making use of multiple solutions to a task: which three they indicate that they would select for a whole-class discussion and in what sequence. Under the hypothetical assumption that each solution has been authored by boys and girls (with below-average and with above-average grades), how do teachers consider distributing opportunities to present the designated solutions? Participants most commonly selected a direct model, an error, or an inductive approach supported by a geometric representation, typically in that sequence (or error, direct model, inductive). Participants tended to indicate that they would invite a girl with below-average grades to present the direct model; a student with above-average grades to present the error; and a boy with above-average grades to present the inductive/geometric solution. Our analysis extends to participants' explanations of their choices and illuminates their intentions: making use of existing status arrangements, leveraging existing hierarchies to benefit others in the class, or modifying the indicated student's status by making space for them to participate on the public floor. Our analysis highlights implications of these patterns, especially in terms of classroom opportunities to learn.