Service-to-Other communities, and their interactions are something we have described in an attempt to give humans an understanding. We have described how
we operate "without money" the title of the piece, for instance, replacing concern and communication for financial transactions. Humans, confused about who
and what is Service-to-Other, assume many people and actions to be thus when it is not. An example might be a vain person, who spends time on their
appearance and is distressed by being dirty or unkempt. Is this Service-to-Other or Service-to-Self? Depends. Given a choice of completing an obligation,
putting the self in distress to help others who need that help, the Service-to-Other vain person would show their colors. If leaning toward Service-to-Self, or
undecided, this person might turn their back on others in need to keep themselves prim, or vacillate. Thus, vanity, or laziness, or argumentativeness, or
combativeness, or intellectual flights, or a tendency to hoard, or a tendency to check out when matters get tense, none of these are in and of themselves exempt
from being part of an Service-to-Other entities behavior.
One must see the Service-to-Other person in a situation where they must chose, or change their behavior, to assist others, or not. We have stated that actions are more important than words, that words do not indicate orientation, but what the person does when a conflict occurs. These conflict situations must be where the person will potentially lose for themselves, lose their life, their possession, their stature, their health, whatever. It is then that you see the nature of the person, when put to this test.
Someone may be considered lazy, but this in effect a difference of opinion on what needs to be done. Must the house be all that clean, the ground trimmed, the car washed, or can life go on just as well with these tasks undone? Someone may be considered unsociable, preferring to isolate themselves rather than interact in endless chatter, but is this a sign that they are not Service-to-Other? Should the situation be that communication and interaction is needed, in order to save the group from distress, the unsociable and uncommunicative one is suddenly a chatterbox! Thus, is it not possible to give humans, who in the main are undecided, guidelines to determine who is Service-to-Other and who is not, nor to advise thus on social structure for a survival groups whom one hopes will be essentially Service-to-Other. These matters will sort out quickly when the shift occurs, with the true colors of humans on display, often a shock to those who assumed otherwise. Wait and see, and be prepared to make changes if need be, at that time.