 He says Leaders need to take a decision. Yes, which is what your point is which is exactly my point But you're going further than that. Yes talking about leaders who take a position Unilaterally Without discussion and without consideration because those are the two criteria that have to be added for autocracy So I'll give you this much some discussion. Yes, okay But we don't have the luxury in the day of speed we live in the day of breakneck speed in today's day and age We don't have the luxury to keep debating until the cows come home So yes some debate, but we have to make a decision. Otherwise somebody else will take the idea move forward We live in the open-source era of speed. Is there not a difference though? I mean everybody here wants strong leaders Oh by the way How many people in here want to be the victim of strong leaders? Let me ask you a different one. Okay, let me let me try this. Yeah, now you talk about debate, right? Last year. Yes, I think you and I spoke about this earlier as well last year when Sundar Pichai of Google fired the the engineer who said that women are Inferior to men both in terms of technology and in terms of leadership Therefore Google should not even aspire to have gender equality at the top He Sundar Pichai fired him. Yes. Now. He had some debate Okay, and then he made a quick decision while he was traveling that this guy be fired and removed from the premises And in public opinion in Google is divided 50 50 on this issue even now world opinion Why should he be fired by just sharing an opinion? But Sundar Pichai did it that sir You know an insult is about to come when somebody To be like saying with respect That's with respect is not an example of autocratic leadership That is an example simply of Leadership taking a decision. Why is that autocratic? because if he kept discussing and His own team was divided on this issue if he kept discussing he would be discussing for a very very long time, sir you