I rushed this one and typed "sieht." I'm usually pretty good with understanding the audio. For some reason, I perceive normal and slow audio somewhere between seht and sieht.
I don't really understand either. I understand why Duo has to phrase it that way (because singular vs. plural), but since that word is there, it shouldn't count as a mistake if you translate it. In my book.
However, the correct phrasing would be, "Seht ihr uns alle?" (in which "alle" does still refer to "ihr", but could just as well refer to "uns": "Can you see all of us?")
I don't completely agree. In "Seht ihr uns alle?" it would quite likely be understood as "Can you see all of us?", with "alle" referring to "uns". If you wanted "alle" to refer to "ihr", you would IMO use the word order "Seht ihr alle uns?".
I think that Seht ihr uns alle? sounds more natural even if the intended meaning is ihr alle rather than uns alle.
Seht ihr alle uns? sounds clunky to me.
Perhaps regional differences again.
True, and if you wanted to stress the "all", it would be "Seht ihr alle uns", not "alles".
The audio is unclear. "Zit e ons" can be interpreted in too many ways to be useful.
"Are you all seeing us?" was rejected by Duo. Isn't you all a proper translation of the Gsecond person plural?