On Jan 5, 7:08*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 1/5/2010 5:56 PM, Robatoy wrote:





On Jan 5, 6:49 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 15:41:17 -0600, Tim Daneliuk

wrote:
On 1/5/2010 2:37 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 14:15:59 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

On 1/5/2010 2:02 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:36:03 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Jan 5, 1:21 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 13:10:01 -0600, Tim Daneliuk

wrote:
On 1/5/2010 12:53 PM, Robatoy wrote:
On Jan 5, 1:29 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

That, Sparky, IS stealing.

Antagonizing again, Tim. What did Big Bro' Robatoy tell you? It's too
smokey in here. Leave!

Or.....?????

I've already provided you with the calculus to shut me up.

Open Source software = collectivism, socialism, communism.

Has was anyone been forced to contribute to Open Source?

I don't know. Why would that matter? It's collectivism, socialism and
communism, regardless.

No it's not. *The specific objection folks like me have is *the use of
force*. *And it is force that characterizes collectivism, of which
socialism and communism are two forms. *Take away the force, and there
is no issue. *

That is where your train goes off the rails. Use of force has ZERO to
do with the definition of collectivism, socialism, or communism.

Open source software is a perfect example of collectivism, socialism
and communism at work.

You may wish to refine words as you like to argue your case, but the ordinary
meaning of all the above embraces the notion of force.

The word you're looking for, I believe, is "volunteerism".

No. You need to spend more time with a dictionary. It is you who is
projecting your own nonsense into the words collectivism, socialism
and communism. None of them are defined by force or coercion. You
clearly don't know what any of them truly mean. You use them as buzz
words with your own agenda making them into something they are not.

That's what he does.

You mean like this:

http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl...s=collectivism

From Wikipedia:

"Collectivism is a term used to describe any moral, political, or
social outlook, that emphasizes the interdependence of every human in
some collective group and the priority of group goals over individual
goals. Collectivists focus on community and society, and seek to give
priority to group goals over individual goals."


This is where YOU add YOUR angle. You add it, defend it, and that is
easy because it is YOUR angle.

Now - show me any example of "putting the group first" as a political
system that isn't done with force or implicit force directed at
individuals

. *There was force/implicit force in all the 20th Century
dictatorships. *It exists in today's Western democracies when they force
some citizens to provide for others (try not paying your taxes and see
what kind of force is brought to bear on you). *It also exists in today's
various collectivist paradises like Iran, N. Korea, Cuba, Syria, ...

When government's stress collectivist outcomes, force or threat of same always
comes with it.

Come on Tim. That method of arguing is high-school grade.