I saw this story in the Union-Tribune last week. Then I heard Jim Rome talking about it on his radio show.

Google's free Gmail service is putting "Mail Goggles" on their computers.

It's funny. We all know about "beer goggles." Well...this, too, involves beer. You see, if you've downed too much, and send your boss an email telling him his toupee looks like crap, or that you peed in the coffee pot...well, it could cost you your job. So, inebriated e-mailers would have to correctly answer five math questions before they can send an email.

I guess they figure if you can add 138 + 126, you're good to go. Who knows what would happen if you had a calculator nearby.

The service would be activated from 10 p.m. to 4 a.m., which I'm guessing, is the time most alcoholics consume.

Is it harsh that I said "alcoholics"? Well, I stand by that. Because, if you need to order some service to keep you from doing something stupid on your computer because you're drunk, maybe you should try putting down the bottle first.

Rome went on this big rant about who it actually is in your address book. It wasn't that funny. It's one of the reasons he's hard to take in large doses.

He did say something funny about why it is math questions they decided to go with. He said, "Why not have the person name the 13 original colonies." He then yelled, "It's 2:15, and I can't name all the planets, damn it! I want to send this email to my ex-girlfriend!"

He brought up another good point about how they need to create a service that lets you take back an email you accidentally sent to the wrong person.

It reminded me of a time I complained about an editor on a music piece I had written. They felt when I mentioned the word "bling" (it was a story on a rapper, who had a song title with this). They wanted an explanation of what that word meant in paranthesis. I told them it wasn't necessary, because everyone knew the word. And if they didn't, it wasn't important to the story anyway. We went back and forth in email. They wanted a five sentence explanation, and it got edited to a few words...I guess that was a victory for me. But I still thought it killed the momentum of the story.

I was then venting to my friend Peg, who is a thousand times worse than me in dealing with bosses. But, I somehow emailed one of those nasty emails to my editor.

I sent another email quickly saying "Sorry, that last email was for someone else. You can just delete it."

Not sure if they read it or not. I surely would. But, that editor always complained about being super-busy, so I really think they did.

And, it was never brought up to me.

Comments

MsGrant Oct. 15, 2008 @ 10:41 a.m.

"from 10 p.m. to 4 a.m., which I'm guessing, is the time most alcoholics consume."

Aren't you the Party Crasher?!? The time most alcoholics consume is between the presence of alcohol and consciousness!

Question: How old are your editors? Eighty-eleven?

0

Josh Board Oct. 15, 2008 @ 12:26 p.m.

Idiot...I'm talking about "functioning" alcoholics. It's not always like in the movies, where Nicolas Cage is an alcoholic, that drinks every second of the day.

0

MsGrant Oct. 15, 2008 @ 1:19 p.m.

Oh, alcoholic lite. The "functioning" kind. You did not say that. You firmly stood by "alcoholic".

"Is it harsh that I said "alcoholics"? Well, I stand by that. Because, if you need to order some service to keep you from doing something stupid on your computer because you're drunk, maybe you should try putting down the bottle first."

"Idiot..." Now that's harsh.

0

Josh Board Oct. 15, 2008 @ 7:34 p.m.

Yeah, the word "idiot" may be harsh, but when someone attacks editors or writers from the Reader, instead of just asking questions, that's the response you'll get from me.

The word "alcoholic" was used, and fit perfectly for my point. I didn't feel the need to clarify.

What I stand by is....if any idiot gets so drunk that they drunk dial, or send nasty emails, because they can't control themselves, they are "alcoholic", by my definition.

0

MsGrant Oct. 15, 2008 @ 8:23 p.m.

I'm sorry, I guess I am new to this blogging thing. I thought it was supposed to be fun. I was trying to be funny. I wasn't questioning you or your intelligence, I was backing you. You said your editors questioned your use of "bling" and made you provide a detailed explanation. Thus implying they are not quite up to speed. And the "eighty-eleven" thing was a reference to the math needed to use the "Mail Goggles" service. I was commiserating. I don't recall attacking you, ever. I love the Reader. Please don't construe my responding to your blog as criticism. It was intended as commentary, as most blogs ask for, not just blind obedience.

"but when someone attacks editors or writers from the Reader, instead of just asking questions, that's the response you'll get from me."

0

Josh Board Oct. 15, 2008 @ 10:47 p.m.

Damn, MsGrant...I'm such an idiot. I didn't even realize what you were saying. Now it makes sense. My bad.

I didn't re-read what I wrote, and I do those late at night before I go to bed.

So, when I read your response, you said "aren't you the party crasher?" and then another sentence about alcoholics and said "are your editors 80 or 11?" I thought that meant for letting ME write about what an alcoholic is, or not editing that properly.

I can't apologize enough. I feel so stupid. I hope you'll continue to post responses...whether you agree or disagree, with what I write.

But, that editor was in their late 40s and they are no longer at the publication I was talking about.

0

Fred Williams Oct. 16, 2008 @ 11:47 a.m.

Aishhh jesshh readin thish 'bout not postin drunk.

Well....mmmmm, lemme tellya, cause yer my bess friend in the hol'werld an that's the truth.

An if you don't like it I say you all can kish my ashhh too. Yeah, I mean you fella. Stop lookin at me that way or I'll bust thish keyboard right over...

Oh, okay. Sorry. Guess I had a bit too drunk an wanna go home now. Jesh gotta send this meshage firsht to Josh and tell 'm he'sh a doofish an don-know nuthin 'bout no google goggle...whateverthehell that thing is called and so he should go'n finna job in gubment er sumthin.

Oh, the room ish spinnin, jesh lemme click thish send button...

0

Josh Board Oct. 17, 2008 @ 1:26 a.m.

Yes!!!!

I missed Fred. Glad to see you're back.

I remember one morning waking up, and there was a big spider on the pillow next to me. And...I realized right then and there, that I must've really had way too much to drink the previous night.

I had heard of beer goggles and brining home an unattractive woman after you're drunk. But....waking up with a spider?

0

antigeekess Oct. 21, 2008 @ 12:12 a.m.

You didn't bring home the spider.

The spider just came to eat the barfly.

:)

0

Josh Board Oct. 22, 2008 @ 9:52 a.m.

Nice.

If there were a computer rimshot, I'd insert it here.

0

Sign in to comment