"If I was a worker who didn't want to share my property with the collective, what would happen? Would I be listened to and allowed to do so? What if a majority of individuals felt this way? Would the controlling minority forcibly take it from them? Then if so in all instances this minority is effectively a new government by redistributing resources, stealing from some to give to others. I'm not into using ad hominem's."

personal or private property? private property does not exist it  is jointly operated by all workers. Personal property (the equivalent of what you produce for society, which you get back an equal amount of ), could be used for whatever you want as long as it doesn't hinder anything or anyone else. If you wished to use your personal property you made through labor to create your own separate means of production, then as you did not use it others would likely be allowed to use it (otherwise it would be a form of economic oppression and control of them, but it still depends on the situation and individuals involved so nothing is certian), but nobody would likely care because more centralised and better controlled means of production tend to do better, and you doing so would be a waste of resources.

To steal a quote -

"Another industry that was totally re-organized was hair-cutting. Before July 19th, there had been 1,100 hairdressing parlors in Barcelona, most of them extremely marginal. The 5,000 assistant hairdressers were among the lowest-paid workers in Barcelona. The Generalitat had decreed a 40-hour week and 15 percent wage increase after July 19th—one of the Esquerra’s attempts to woo worker support. This spelled ruin for many hairdressing shops. A general assembly was held and it was agreed to shut down all the unprofitable shops. The 1,100 shops were replaced by a network of 235 neighborhood haircutting centers, with better equipment and lighting than the old shops. Due to the efficiencies gained, it was possible to raise wages by 40 percent. The entire network was run through assemblies of the CNT barber’s union. The former owners became members of the union.[30]"


"What if a majority of individuals felt this way? Would the controlling minority forcibly take it from them"
The goal of communism and anarchy is to allow the will of the majority to show through democracy. If the will of the majority is to allow each individual to control a separate means of production on their own, so be it. There would be two collectives where each did that. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSMOwjsBX1s


Although, if one was capitalist and one communist the capitalist would almost always be forced to go war or lose its power. Remember, capitalism is control of the minority for profit. 

Again, revolution can not reasonably happen without popular support. Around 80% of the people in the USSR wanted to keep it communist, and stalin is one of the most popular figures in their history. (Although, he did still make many mistakes)



"then if so in all instances this minority is effectively a new government by redistributing resources, stealing from some to give to others. "
The life of one person is worth a million times more than the property of the richest man on Earth. Again, it is controlled through a mix of direct and indirect democracy. Each member of the working class is a member of the government. 

Again, look at the parable of the divided island.


To sum it up, its not stealing if you decide to live in the society that does this, the decisions is always dictated by the will of the majority, and it does better economically so few people will actually leave the society.

"From the wikipedia page: 'Once collectivization takes place, money would be abolished to be replaced with labour notes and workers' salaries would be determined'' - so a central authority would do this, assuming all power? How long would it take to abolish all money? How would labour notes be arranged? By a central authority, thereby offering no different a solution to the previous one."

The workers themselves are the authority, there is no centralised authority needed to do this. The labor notes are arranged by the workers themselves and managed through labor unions of direct democracy. Again it is anarchist, so only those who wish to take part in this form of society will, and those who do not will likely join in with other groups.

"'Bakunin's socialism seeks... equality in the social rights of every individual from birth; in particular, equal means of subsistence, support, education, and opportunity for every child, boy or girl, until maturity, and equal resources and facilities in adulthood to create his own well-being by his own labor' - Equality truly doesn't exist. And even if it did there would be no incentive to produce anything long term, some individuals will have a lust for power and seek to be unequal in relation to others. The need to obtain power doesn't look to be in any way peaceful."


https://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/

https://theredphoenixapl.org/2011/06/02/the-human-nature-argument/

"I can give you something we do agree on: Intellectual Property is a fiction, as it is not tangible."

All property is fiction.

"As I have stated, you have a preconceived set of values and ideals, so do I, these do not meet in all ways and will not be changed, therefore there is no point in continuing this."

My values and ideals change through debate and understanding of other viewpoints, do not force your unchanging nature onto me.