#9 thanks for getting me back to normal times.
In many Pre-Election debates, it’s about political parties and
as far as I know, you are not allowed to recruit members at work.
So I agree with you, all forms of discourse are necessary. Three weeks ahead, I’ll see no more problem there.

– Number 2: you wouldn’t speak of empires within companies? Ha! Then I can only say this: we have apparently worked in different companies. The ones I have been part of have been *bursting with* (competing, warring) empires.

– Number 9: that hasn’t been my experience. I have had rigorous and lively political discussions in every German company I have ever worked in, often over coffee. The assumption that social networks linked by software should not have that kind of (perfectly natural and human) discourse is a terrible error, in my opinion. Germany is no exception. In my company, which is a huge multi-national, we are deliberately allowing this sort of discourse. It is interesting to watch people from Europe debate with people from Texas about Sarah Palin, or climate change. It is even more interesting to observe that — as expected — people behave like professional, responsible adults when in a work context, even whilst having such conversations. My point is, the Internet Manifesto argues that all forms of human discourse are appropriate on the Net, and you are disagreeing (in a work context) (and assuming I understood you correctly). I disagree with you, and agree with the Manifesto. I think all forms of discourse (to include politics) must not only be *allowed*, they are *necessary* — they are the foundations of trust.

Just my .02.