mcolome1
Actually, it's a PDF on a google drive. It's not a true "google doc". Google docs include a number of featrues and functionality that make them socialist friendly, such as the ability to vote and collaborate in a classless way without owning the document as property. A PDF in a google drive allows the public fewer freedoms and more restrictions.
Your commentary has nothing to do with the documents that Matt published which is about the European Investment Bank related to the topic that we are discussing which is about the Banking System, the purpose of banking in our society, and why we would not a banking system in a socialist society. It does not make any difference if the documents were written on stone, a piece of carboard, or PDF.Google is not a socialist institution, and it does not advocate for a classless society either, it is own by a corporation, and the user are member of the working class, they belong to a class, and the owners of Google belong to a particular class also. After spending so much time in this forum, you do not have a clue of what socialism is, what is the meaning of property, what is a class society, what is the meaning of classless. You are totally confused
my commentary had nothing to do with the "CONTENT" of the documents that matt published. My commentary had everything to do with the mode of distribution available to the document. It makes a differences because the medium and mode of distribution (either a PDF or a True Google Doc) defines the relationship of the document. A PDF can never fullfull the socialist goal of being not owned by anyone. So PDF format, by it's nature requires an "owner" and that requires the establishment of "property". A google document has more options for setting the "property ownership" (aka permission settings) of a document. If you insist that comunism or socialism will have NO PROPERTY and no one will own anything, then I am arguing a google doc is a better solution than a PDF for practicing socialism today.