Not my place to defend it as I don't understand how it would truly work. But, a proponent would say you're defining "authoritarian communism", whereas their anarchist communism would have no ruler, and rather people would collectively own their production and resources.

I can understand this on a micro scale e.g. a single family household that shares everything. I can also understand it on basis of some magic hypothetical future where there is so much abundance that ownership of anything ceases to yield any benefits.

But yes, otherwise confusing