Damn good question. I think a kind of collectivism emerges from agorism. Sure, you are free to operate in isolation if you wish, but one benefits from collaboration and cooperation with others, so there is incentive to do so. Also, in an agorist society, individuals are free to pursue their own ends, provided those ends are not to harm others. Those ends can be altruistic if that individual wishes it. For me personally, I love people and seeing them empowered and free, so part of the profit I gain from this venture is that satisfaction. The difference is that a true agorist will never force a collectivist agenda on people who want no part in it. The ends DO NOT justify the means, so if people voluntarily form a collective and are free to leave at will, then I see no contradiction there with agorism. Forcing people to comply with your vision of what the collective should be...there we have problems! So, in the case of Silk Road, people are free to participate or not. If there is anything they don't like about it, they can use any alternatives available to them. Therefore, we are a voluntary community. I guess the point of my first post is that I don't operate in a vacuum. If I make bad decisions, people leave. If I make good ones, people stay and spread the word even. So yea, if we want to prosper, I need you and you need me. That relationship is the fiber that builds up to make something like Silk Road have a life of it's own. The collective part is just an observation of this. Instead of trying to control this development, a big part of my job is staying out of the way and letting the pattern emerge.