“Live-It-Forward” Gratuity Model

Posted on Posted in Announcements, Start Here, Thoughts
“Live-It-Forward” Gratuity Model

JR Korpa @ Unsplash

Few people likely understand what I mean by “Live-It-Forward” model*. Here I clarify my differences versus that of the famed Pay It Forward Model.

*Note that this is largely a hypothesis in the making, thus revisions & re-clarifications are inevitable.

What is “Live-It-Forward” model?

It is a reciprocal model of gratifying life experiences as “Progress” (“Live-It”). Rather than forwarding of “Outcomes” (“Pay-It”).  At a glance, there is nothing wrong with this famed Pay-It-Forward model. Assuming you have (out of surplus) – instrumental charity for assisting, or inspiring those of lesser’s circumstance.

But what is exactly needed before such an “Outcome”? Simple, it’s Progress. And any “progress” – is determined by Ability. Biology. Physiology. Drive. Authenticity. In other words, “Live-It-Forward” model can be thought of as the needed-precursor. Before instrumental charity (“Pay-It-Forward”) event becomes possible.

The “Gratuity” component is the respect of subjectively individual realisation of experiences. Through authentic written comments, rather than merely the arithmetic distribution of “Outcomes”. Manifested through “Likes”, “number of followers”, “number of page visits”, “analytics”, etc.

“You”, as the prospective reader & visitor of my Book and branding initiative are authentically responsible for developing your own potentials of self-gratitude, first and foremost.

Before you can then spend it elsewhere – as an extension of that gratitude.

Why “Live-It-Forward” is more authentic?

It is an emphasis on the “experiencing” of progress, rather than simply the “passing” of outcomes. 

“Live-It-Forward” model relies not by arithmetic distributions of gratitude. Instead, it’s determined through the individual’s own biological and nutritional authenticities. Capably determining whether they can “Live-Through” any one of the solicited advice/s, or principle/s offered on the table.

“Live-It-Forward” model further encourages more genuine, evident accountability of gratitudes; through sincere writing. Rather than arithmetic binary give-away dismissals such as “Likes” or “Dislikes”.

So, here are three “aspects” compartmentalising this Model. In the context of sharing gratitudes amidst our (troubled and misused) Social Media.

Eutah Mizushima @ Unsplash

1/3

“Likes” and/or “Subscriptions” are welcome. But frivolous, at best.

Handing out “likes” is as lazy as saying “I’m flattering you enough as is! Can’t you see? But I don’t wish to contribute further to your benevolence ecosystem!”. I understand that some anonymity and privacy amidst emotional exchanges is important. Yes, giving away “Likes” are readily convenient and nobody has any “time” stringing together meaningful comments. Yet they can readily string it all in their head.

However, one must question whether seeing a number or an arithmetic change alone – truly makes that world of a positivity. What if those numbers are subject to deception or manipulation? For all we know, we might be interacting with a bot.

Sure, I’d be thankful to anyone who actually leaves me a “Like”. But then what next? More “numbers”? FOMO Dopamine rush kicks in. *Kaching* Not enough. Want more. *Purchases Automated-Bot -Likes- subscription plan”. 

So, do numbers, I mean mathematical symbols of “numbers” alone – empirically earns me respect? Materially speaking, yes. But Biologically? Subjective and potentially meaningless, at best.

I very rarely subscribe or follow famous people’s advices. But Jordan Peterson’s exam on the word “Respect” (3:05 onwards) is noteworthy. I myself (with few) do not always agree with his stances on few things. But here I do agree – we do not (and cannot) simply give away Respect. We must instead earn it. Through exchanging biological resources be it mineral levels, glycogens, neurotransmitters. For meeting our daily individual (solitary) survival or sociological (benevolence) objectivities.

But one might argue then, “What if you have no audience as witness in first place?” As sadly as it is an unfair dilemma, this is reserved for yet another discussion altogether. It’s likely too long for me to address all in this one straight reading.

2/3

Biological Experience + Instrumental Rewards = True Gratitude.

Numbers only represents glasses served “half-full”. Each and every moment of thanks-giving should impose (firstly) Biological expression, as follows:
  1. I am validated biologically; be it through body language, gestures, handshakes, hugs, pats on the back. For what I have done as servitude has indeed been organically interpreted as “enough“.
  2. …Before then I am rewarded instrumentally. Be it through monetary wages, income, tangible materials & resources needed for that one day I may be able to reciprocate this experience onto others.

The problem with simply giving away “Likes” is that such gratuity model is almost empty. A shell without soul. Incomplete, unwarranted gratitude. “What” do people thank you “for”? They do not thank you for nothing.

Again, compare seeing a “like” counter as opposed to genuinely written form of thanks. That is -a short account which need not be lengthy. Which one do you feel convinced? 

Saskia van Manen @ Unsplash

3/3

Debates are conducive. Only when they come out “even”.

The problem with our current Social Media is we are forcibly bound to make one of two (2) extreme binary choices. Like or Dislike. Which inevitably brews into realm of Debating. Should we allow freedom of expression? Of course we should.

But we need to re-evaluate the lines between what is Cooperative and what is Destructive / Coercive – debates.

I consider “Debates” only as cooperative under an outcome that both sides have arrived towards equal intensity of correctness. After all “Cooperative” means that we are inevitably “Even”, in spite of differing experiences. One might “wins” each other out from one different context, one interpretation, at a time. But remains subject to “lose” against another’s list of confounders, and vice versa. Repeat this exchange of arguments long enough, then voila we’re back to square one – you keep you, I keep mine. No problems then, “We’re even.”

However if mistaken as an insecurity or of desire to provoke Quantified superiority – now that would be Destructive and Coercive

 Everything is context-dependantBelieve anything in excess, but do not overstay your welcome. 

Seth Macey @ Unsplash

TLDR; Don’t just “Pay-it” forward.

But “Live-It-Through”. All the way. Hence, “Live-It-Forward”.

Opinions and judgments after all, are free. Experiences and circumstances on the other hand? Priceless. You will both agree and disagree with any one of my thoughts and “experiences”.

This Project aims to differ from its nutritional or fitness motivation peers. By its’ daringly broad discussions beyond the subject of “food” alone. Beyond accounts of frugal resilience. Whey cheesecake recipes. And surprising findings of Omega-6 PUFAs in Ketogenic intervention.

All the way to thoughts on the Mouse Utopia experiment. Then examining Survivorship Bias. There’s also my thoughts on Veganism. Plus – my wider thoughts on Intermittent Fasting.

I do not shame anyone for not being aware all along, that this *sort* of branding initiative does exist. All in the effort of one (1) individual. Yet remaining lost and undiscovered amidst “health & fitness” survivorship iconographies.

At least, seeing a comment or two would be nice considering thousands of hours work done all in the background.

Much better than seeing a “Like” received. Wouldn’t you agree?

 


Are there any other models of gratuity that you can think of that are seemingly applicable? I’d love to hear your thoughts below.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *