The conversation we had was around land ownership, which I do not believe in for a variety of reason physical & metaphysical.
In terms of private property, it has a very different meaning to capitalists than it does to mutualists/syndicalists/etc., and I tend to prefer their conceptof personal property. Generally speaking, it's a topic that I don't see much value in pushing until we get to a place where violence & coercion are no longer culturally acceptable. I collaborate with, support, and interact with all forms of anarchists, and believe that once we reach anarchy, all the rest is personal preference, and a combination of personal discernment & spontaneous order will take care of those details.
Ownership of the land I buy and spend my entire life improving is an awfully important issue to me. I cannot build wealth or pass it on to my children without having private property too. Those against it have no way of preventing it either without using immoral force.
We've already gone down this path before, and I have no interest in doing it again because my experience was a feeling of being ignored while the same thing was repeated at me over and over even after I had addressed it multiple times in multiple ways.
Without a clear defintion of property, we can never arrive at a place where violence is not acceptable.
I don't find that to necessarily be true, and as I said before when talking to Finnian and others, I much prefer the idea of personal property as put forth by folks like Proudhon, because I see no space in a moral society for usury, and that is the difference drawn between "private" & "public" in those schools.
Is @jamesc 's 1.5 million SP personal or private property?
You haven’t clearly addressed and defined property, which is not @finnian’s shortcoming here, man.