Holy crap!  How could you guess?

Mishe?

Jack

(Explanation: Jack and Jill...)

Do you think I'm joking?  Check my sig. 

@xeno

Depending on how public the company is, I would buy that argument.  Why?  Because then the business becomes no different than a democratic government, except in the way that the organization wields its power.

Think about it.  The government retains a monopoly on the use of force within the region it declares as its territory (for the most part.  Let's not get into international relations issues).  What separates a legitimate government from an illegitimate government, theoretically, is how much the government respects the people within its sphere of influence.  That's the idea that derived democracy: through increased public participation, the government authority would become accountable to the people within its sphere of influence by distributing the power to them.

Now, bring that to a publicly traded company.  Each share of stock is also a vote in the company's affairs, indirectly (just as buying a product is an approval of a business, buying stock is the same thing) as well as directly in some cases (common stock gives stockholders the right to vote in business affairs).  So if a company is publicly traded, it distributes its power to the public.  As long as at least 51% of common stock is released to the public, the public has the authority to influence the business activities, meaning it works.

NOTE: I'm not standing by this.  I'm proposing a theoretical argument here, because presenting theoretical arguments is fun.  Consider it a hypothesis testing scenario. 

All these ICC draft threads pop up!  I'm a trendsetter! 

Llama?

I talked with Evilsheep about it, and he ended up closing it.  It was all a misunderstanding, in large part.  Thanks, mods!

Now I just need to figure out how to tell Justinian that he can come back to the forums. 

Ditto, except replace the F word with "to hell with." 

I'll refer you to Question's post above.

Nope!

Darkmatt?

Want the job?  (That ought to ensure that nobody assassinates me)

> Einstein wrote:

> so this seems to sum up so far that Anarchy is better than all the eliminated things, but Conservatism and Libertarianism is better than Anarchy

Assuming you buy that the elimination game is an accurate representation of an ideal, of course.