In another month, it will be the fifth anniversary of the Ali mooncake incident.

In September 2016, during a mooncake grab within the group, four guys from Ali's security department used the "plug-in" to brush 124 more boxes.

After learning about this, the administrative department took out the contract in half an hour, and the four "thieves" even saved the link of work handover and were thrown out directly.

My comment at that time was: are the four guys guilty of heinous crimes? Ali must "borrow your head" to prove Qingming.

Over the past five years, the "mooncake incident" has become the tortured hand of Alibaba Group Holding Ltd repeatedly questioned by the public.

The so-called "punishment is not superior to the high P" and the "love affair" to the recent "drunken rape", people have a yardstick: you have just made a decision on the killing of those who rob mooncakes, and in the face of things that challenge public order and customs, why is the board laid so light and slow?

124 boxes of mooncakes can be sand that cannot be rubbed into your eyes, or tears that can flow when you take a deep breath in front of the camera. We thought we saw an enterprise with a high degree of "mental cleanliness", but we didn't want to see its values such as the tightness of underwear.

Even if there was the "art of work" of "setting an example" in the "mooncake incident", it also reflected the smooth flow of information of Ali at that time, and the small farce was quickly judged by the leadership as a major matter of values, proving that they had taut strings in their heads and a method of awe in their hearts. For example, at the beginning of the founding of the people's Republic of China, Liu Qingshan and Zhang Zishan were sentenced to capital punishment, showing that "it is difficult to sit in rivers and mountains" for a long time.

But for Ali, in less than five years, when female employees issued major allegations, no first-level leader came up with measures to actively follow up, forcing the victim to seek external help by handing out leaflets in the canteen and drumming grievances on the intranet.

It's a shame not to protect a woman. It is very humiliating for an enterprise to let women lose their dignity and regain their dignity after being humiliated.

These five years are five years when Internet companies are constantly hammered by all parties, five years when buildings rise and collapse, and five years when they are constantly questioned and disenchanted by the public.

There is reason to believe that enterprises are more concerned with the big issue of survival or destruction, and more about how to avoid the fist of attack on the other side. I am afraid there is a lot of laziness in the exposition and indoctrination of corporate culture and values.

There is a sad dilemma. The granary knows the etiquette, the food and clothing knows the honor and disgrace. Think about it, when the "mooncake incident", Ali and other enterprises are in the limelight, have leisure to do internal rectification, strict management of enterprises. But now that everyone is having a hard time, the value sequence of the enterprise has been broken up again, and I am afraid that if we mention the corporate culture again, it will fall into the mouth of "the whole loser."

Whether qu is raped or not has its own legal conclusion. But if it is true to repeatedly go in and out of women's rooms and pour wine to please customers, it is still an indecent and unseemly dirty move.

The difficulty for women in the workplace is that they are still seen in business as an element of sexual welfare or success in negotiations. Whether it is the need of the atmosphere or the more sinister purpose, very often, when they sit on the wine table, the attribute of "tool man" is doomed when they touch the first glass of wine.

The disadvantages of "wine culture", poison for thousands of years, adult and voluntary principles are far from being able to guide the status quo. In situations where power and resources are unequal (including corporate banquets and media), I suggest adopting the "law" in me too: no is no.

If you don't drink, you don't drink.

Of course, when we go back to the Ali incident, it is not appropriate to enlarge the element of "drinking". Even if we prevaricate with "there are all kinds of birds in the forest", the most unforgivable scene is the comfort and tiredness of handling afterwards.

Han Feizi said: "slow heart but no success, soft Ru but few decisions, likes and dislikes are indecisive, and do not make up their minds, may also die."

Finally say a word: time is so difficult, Internet enterprises also collapse houses one after another, the inside and face will not be saved. Let's do it a little harder.