I think adults routinely navigate this situation without melting down, and so am very wary about attributing the author's experience in any way to alcohol. If you choose to consume alcohol in a business setting, you remain entirely responsible for your behavior.

I'm not sure how to make this any clearer: The question on this subthread has nothing to do with the article except for the location.

I know you think it doesn't, but I think you're wrong. I think this "business shouldn't happen in bars" talk is used by people to disqualify others. "Forget about fixing sexual harassment. Fix business happening in bars, first."

OK, I don't know what belorn had in mind when he asked his question. But I know what I have in mind, and it has nothing to do with disqualifying concerns about sexual harassment and everything to do with the fact that I don't drink alcohol and really don't understand drinking culture.

So, with that established: Why do people make critical business decisions in bars?

For at least two big reasons:

* A social outing lets people pretend to be friends, and to act like friends, while skipping the months and years of effort it takes to actually become friends. It's an "act the part, be the part" trick.

* Intoxicants create a polite fiction that allows people to be direct and blunt in a way they can't in a formal business setting, which expedites dealmaking.

A person under the influence is always entirely responsible for their behavior, be that assaulting a stranger or driving a car into someone else. Being drunk doesn't remove the responsibility if you cause a crash, it makes it worse.

I do however think it make for a bad move if a taxi company has a open bar for cab drivers who is on the job. Its a design for disaster. The taxi company would have made a bad decision, and the drivers are still 100% responsible if they drive drunk. The one do not exclude the other.