Here's a random scenario.

Imagine you are in a boat, and you want to reach an island quite far away. Many of your kind are also on a voyage to the same island, albeit in different boats. For some strange reason, we are all wired to reach that island. That is supposedly where we will all be happy. The seas are choppy and rough, swamped with sharks and well, non- sharks.

Your boat is comfortable, not the most beautiful nor not the most happening one. In fact, it is how you would imagine a boat to be if someone asked to think about a boat. You hope that it will be able to get you to where you want to go, aka the island. However, you aren't sure. Along the voyage, there might be a severe storm which might wreck your boat. Or someone might come and hijack your boat.

Imagine you see a state of the art yacht sailing alongside you, with beautiful white sails. There might be a ship captain; there might not. What would you do? Would you jump overboard and risk getting eaten by sharks, and yet have a shot at boarding that yacht? Or would you stay in your comfortable boat and think about your options when your boat sinks or when someone else makes you walk the plank?

People always say the grass is greener on the other side. But Steve begs to differ - he views that saying as more of a way to console oneself or to advise someone against taking risks and staying in their comfort zone.

There are many things in life that one will not know or fully comprehend if they did not try it out for themselves. If you can tell someone that this job is not your cup of tea, how is the other person to know if it is not his? Bringing that example to life, if we do not take risks and try out new things, how are we to know if that is harmful to us or we will not like it?

In everything that we do, there are always the downside to it. Risk is proportionate to its rewards; the higher the risk, the greater the rewards. If we do not take the leap of faith, will we not know if we have fully lived life to the fullest? This is why Steve feels that people who always use the phrase "the grass is greener on the other side" are always afraid to take risks - they prefer to live in their comfort zone; to always drink the same cup of coffee, to always go to the same places, to do same things.

Hypothetical situation - what if you do know that somewhere out there, there is a place where you feel that you will be happy? Would you go there and be happy or would you just put it down as the grass is greener on the other side? Of course, realistically speaking, we might face the situation of us not being able to fit in and be disappointed. But disappointment is and will always be part of life.

Steve knows that there is a place out there for him. A place where there is just so much natural beauty that it is surreal. THAT is painted by the greatest artist ever - God. A place where people can walk along the streets and holler out "hola" to each other without someone thinking you are crazy. A place where you smile to greet a random stranger in the streets rather than being jaded and giving grumpy looks to the next guy, as if he had just irritated you. A place where people think about "hey let's take a day off and go relax at the beach" rather than wondering when their next paycheck is coming from. A place where money is of secondary importance to making merry. A place where freedom is valued over rules. A place where it encourages you to live life the way you want it rather than for the greater good. A place where it encourages you to live in the present rather than always worrying about the future. A place where social norm is scorned and freedom of expression is valued above all. A place where the elderly are respected rather than dumped at an elderly home, awaiting death.

If Steve knows that this is what he wants and he knows that place exists, does "the grass is greener on the other side" hold any weight? It is Steve's dream to be free and soar like the eagle rather than be chained and run a rat race. It is Steve's dream to eventually live and die in Europe. That above all.

Carpe diem - seize the day. There is no better way to live life than that.

With seemingly the whole of Singapore on the back of a certain Miss Ris Low, Steve would like to offer her support. While her values are questionable, her looks not exactly the kind that makes guys go wow and her command of the English language is not of the highest standard, it is a shame that anyone, representing Singapore in any contest or in any way, should have to put up with all the abuse. It is just so easy to pick on someone, especially a naive public figure in this wireless world where cowards (yes cowards) miraculously find the bravery to offer their two cents worth on this matter.

In this cyber world we live in today, more and more people are speaking up. It would be a good thing if the society we live in oppresses free speech and thought aka a certain up and coming world superpower and that we offer constructive thoughts and opinions. Yet for all the good that has come out from this anonymous channel of expression, there is always the ugly side to it.

One very good example would be our Miss Ris Low saga. True, her values are questionable. Yes, she may not be the prettiest girl. And we agree that her grasp of the English language is weak. But how many of these brave souls who stoned Miss Low actually revealed their identity? Most of these cyber cowards used a nickname or come up with a whole range of poorly filmed youtube satires of the ill advised interview. RAD BEE KEE NEEE. If the biographer of Steve had a dollar every time he heard that, Steve would have to find a new biographer by now.

Let those who are without sin throw the first stone. How many of our cyber cowards are actually so morally upright? How many of them actually do look better than our Ms Ris Low? Lastly, how many of these clowns can actually hold a proper conversation in proper English? Are you any better? "But I'm not representing Singapore," the cyber cowards might argue. Well if you feel that you are in the position to stone our disgraced Miss Singapore World, are you not saying that you are better? Then why are you not flying the colours of Singapore? At least she had the courage to do so.

Her recent interview with Channel Newsasia, while not perfect, showed the character she had. Here is a brave soul, who despite all the barbs and bad publicity, is still, in her own words "standing tall". And that, is something that our cyber cowards are sadly lacking. For that, and that alone, Steve is full of respect for her.

Our public humiliation of our Miss Singapore World is more embarrassing to Singapore than the actual event of sending her to the world pageant. It showed that there are so many cowards amongst us. Since Steve is on the case of cyber cowards, he would like to highlight another point.

While Stomp started out as a forum for people to send in pictures to raise awareness about social ills or interesting events around our tiny little island, it is repulsive to see so many Stomp videos of public display of affection. How childish can these people be? Stomp seems to have descended into a territory for voyeurism and cyber cowardice to thrive. Steve would seriously advise people who have their photos published in the Stomp forum to take legal action against these cowards. Failing that, should Stomp refuse to divulge the names of these cowards, they should go ahead and sue Stomp for not filtering out these invasion of personal rights. Taking photos of other people without their permission is a legal issue. There is a fine line between what is currently happening in Stomp and having a camera fitted in a changing room.

As per normal, Steve would have to add a disclaimer so that there will be no legal honchos hunting for him:

Steve would like to declare that the above content is just his personal view and is no position to advise anyone to do anything. He would like the people who do read it and feel as strongly about Stomp to think it through before doing anything. He does not have the intention to smear Stomp's name or to bring legal lawsuits to their doorsteps. NOW Steve is a cyber coward too!

If you see the symptoms of an illness, would you treat it early or wait till you die from it?

If you see the signs of destruction of a city, would you try to save it or watch it burn?

For those wondering why recent posts from Steve have been about boy girl relationships, Steve would like to set things straight.

This all boils down to a very basic principle - essentially, Steve believes that how a guy approaches the woo-ing of a girl shows whether he has the innate ability to succeed. While what Steve believes may not be wholly accurate, as in not every player would end up as the next Bill Gates or Warren Buffett for that matter, the guy who is able to get a girl would more likely succeed than the one who doesn't. Let Steve explain.

First Steve would like to define the subject matter of getting a girl. The entire objective is just being able to get a girl for whatever purposes the guy might have - be it for marriage, a fling or just to test out his skills.

Next, we have to eliminate those who are not in the game altogether, for one reason or another. It could be because the guy wants to lead a secular life or because he thinks that he has better things to concentrate on. We have to include people who don't approve of marriage but yet are in the game for physical and emotional pleasure.

At the end of the day, it does not matter how long or how much resources are devoted to getting a girl - it is getting her that matters. The brutal game of love is almost identical to the real world. There will always be winners and there will always be losers. At the end of the day, it is the survival of the fittest - the best will always get the best and the worst will end up with nothing.

There are of course a few categories of successful men in this matter. The first would be the naturals - these people have it all. They might be handsome, talented, tall, rich or just smooth talkers. In the real world, they are the people who are supremely talented who don't have to move a muscle to do well in their area of work.

The next are those who are not naturals but realise that they are horribly deficient in this area. As such, they employ ways to brush on their skills to succeed in this cut throat arena. Even in the real corporate world, we can learn skills that enable us to do well in our field of work. Similarly, learning the tricks of the trade in the game of love that enables us to triumph can easily be compared to people who work insanely hard to where they are today. It is all about knowing your own limitations and working on them to make them your strengths. If one knows his limitations and does nothing to work on them, he would not be able to break out of his social status.

Skills like adapting to the whims and fancies of different types of girls reflect the ability of a guy to adapt to different situations in the corporate world. There is no way that a negotiation technique can be applied to different customers. It is all about knowing your enemy, knowing your objective and adapting to achieve your objective. The stubborn ones who are unable to get a girl because they refuse to change reflects a trait in a person - that he is very stiff and that he probably should not be in front line operations that requires adaptations.

A guy who puts his ego and "face" above all is unlikely to get a girl, simply because he is afraid of failure. Would you as an employer want to hire someone like this to run your company? This person is unable to get out of his comfort zone and take on risks. There is an proportionate relation between risks and returns - the higher the risks, the higher the returns. As such, employing this person to run your company would mean meagre returns on the capital invested.

Perseverance is important in wooing a girl. If a guy keeps giving up half way when he is chasing a girl, it says a lot about his character. When the going gets tough, this same guy would not have the stomach and fight to go through the rough parts. If he keeps giving up when the going gets tough, how is he going to succeed in life?

It is easy to simply conclude that girls go for successful guys. Steve is guilty of it and he puts his hands up to admit that. But what is inherent is these traits that made him successful are often the very same traits that he employs when he chases after a girl.

The last skill that Steve would like to point out is of course knowing when to strike. A guy who dithers here and there when the point of reckoning comes often fails to land his choice target. How then would he be able to seize opportunities that come his way? If he keeps letting opportunities slip, there is very little chance he will move up in the world.

The last kind of people of course, are those who just wait until the time when they realise that they are still not getting their targets and just order a bride, get match- made or simply just exit the game altogether. These are the people best suited for back office jobs where work is routine and that the drive that pushes us to test our limits is missing.

All in all, it is not that difficult to know how far a person will go just from his attitude towards getting a girl. Should Steve be an employer in future, the one question he will ask the male interviewees would be - what is your attitude towards getting a girl? Of course, some of us are late bloomers. Some realise later in life that it is time to take care of our short comings. Therefore, while this test might not be foolproof, it does weed out people that are destined to stay in the social circle that they are born in.