Sure, there's this New York Times essay on the psychology of flame emails, but of course it's all fulla science and chin-scratching, plus an unfair smear on your brain's amygdala as an impulsive flaming bitch-gland. Good examples of proper flames are, at best, alluded to. Fortunately, there are comments on the story, but unfortunately, they also suck. An alarming number reveal the Gray Lady's gray readership by alluding to pre-email communications like telephones, letters, banging on rocks, etc. Only one commenter is pro-flame, and another offers the slyly relevant anti-flame chestnut, "If you wouldn't be happy seeing it on the front page of the New York Times, don't send it." No mention of drunk e-mailing, though of course, you can always brew your own.