So-called Human Compassion is not an obligation neither legally nor morally whether hatred, sharing, donation or whatever. I already said that the trashes are not entitled & I am not obligated to fake the facts nor change my would-action nor share nor donate anything. This is about obligation & entitlement. Not whether little or a lot. It's not a rightful demand. It's not even wanted. To each his own, each makes their own choice with their rightful legitimate free will. I am not obtuse. I am acute. What do you mean "how the world works"? Would that be in terms of some invisible entitlement the trashes have or some invisible obligation I am supposed to have to the trashes? No. Neither legally nor morally. Not interested. Rejected. Not wanted. + wrongful. I have no "human compassion" when it means a demand unreasonable & wrongful. I am not obligated to have such. Neither legally nor morally, a person is not obligated to such. It’s wrong. Just because you call someone obtuse doesn't make it true. That just makes it a "you wish". Everything falls within logic; the logic & the rightful states are just not what "you" want. Your definition of selfish is not really relevant. It's not selfish when it's rightful. Expecting something outside what you should reasonably expect is the one selfish & self-centered. Don't bring what you want to someone else as if they are obligated to think or act in the way "you" want. Keep it to yourself only. The other people shouldn't have to be bothered by what you want. Not interested. Rejected. That's final. Google dictionary says greed is "intense and selfish desire for something" & "having an excessive desire". Selfish is "concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure". Profit = "gain". Personal = "of or concerning one's private life, relationships, and emotions". Hence, owners marking their own properties as theirs is not of greed. It is not a personal wish but a public, factual, reality state. Also, it is not a gain. Gain is to "increase the amount or rate of". Dictionary. The owners are not selfish, excessive or greedy. The thieves are. We did go over how being greedy is irrelevant anyway. Only the owners marking their properties as theirs is right & should in all cases. It has nothing to do with whether it is greedy or not. It is just that it is not greedy, selfish & excessive; the thieves asking otherwise are. This was obvious without looking up a dictionary to the lowest dictional hierarchy in language. Is this supposed to be murky? Looks obvious. It is that the thieves are so blinded & obsessed by their greed (they are the only one with the greed; the owners are sensible & righteous). 1. I know obtuse is not defined by how you want to insist someone just because you can't have what you want. I know obtuse is not defined by how you not getting what you want when it is wrongful & illogical certainly not entitled & the opponent not obligated. 2. Just because you wish to call something selfish doesn't make it so. 3. It is not profit nor gain when you are sticking to the rightful properties. There is no gain. There is nothing personal. Everything is just in their rightful places & states. I am not talking about me. I am talking about some people acting like they are entitled to their wrongful demand & how there is no obligation to meet such. 4. Whether military demands human compassion or not, I am not obligated to such. I just don't want to be in the military if they ask for such. As a person, I have my rights & free will. I am neither legally nor morally obligated to "human compassion" especially when it refers to a wrongful demand. I am not interested. I shouldn't be forced such. 5. I am done with this.