a) Value (inception towards death) generates evaluation (life)...evaluating the suggested values by another devalues oneself.

b) Nothing implies suggested nihil-ism (Latin nihilo; nothing) and ones consenting de-nial of everything perceivable for it.

c) Contribute and discussion implies CON (together; with) DIS (apart, asunder, in a different direction) aka a contradiction, hence all contributing partials within any discussion finding themselves within a conflict of reason against one another.

Notice the option (up-vote or down-vote) next to each "contribution" to any "discussion"...it doesn't matter what is written, only that those reading it consent to conflicts of reason about it.

d) Honor implies versus dishonor...yet another conflict of reason, and no matter how much honor or dishonor one has; the conflict continues.

e) Notice that contribute implies TRIBUTE; noun - "stated sum of money or other valuable consideration paid by one ruler or country to another in acknowledgment of submission or as the price of peace or protection"

Next notice that free-will-of-choice doesn't con-tribute (Post Score - 0)...why?...because choice implies reaction within enacting balance.

Motion offers balance (inception/death)...matter reacts as choice (life). Ignoring this for each others suggested choices implies imbalance.

f) How about this...can nature contribute nothing of value to those within?

g) The topic here is about revolt...so how does discussing contributions revolt against anything?

If I'm the one standing out with my behavior from the norm of contributing to discussions, then what if I'm the one breaking apart from established authority aka revolting?

Do jews contribute to discussions or do jewish suggestions set the foundation for consenting gentiles to contribute their opinions within discussions?