TexasCHLforum.com

RottenApple wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:I converted this thread to a poll -- please register your vote!

There needs to be an option for "depends on what the e-vite says".

Essentially nothing. In fact I had to look around to figure out it was actually a wedding. The facebook notice just said I'd been invited to an event with the couple's first names and the city its located at.

What is this book of faces you're rambling on about?

Tacky. That's all. Just plain tacky.

Crossfire wrote:Tacky. That's all. Just plain tacky.

Mrs. Sjfcontrol and I agree!

For me, yeah, I'd miss it because I don't do Facebook.

But for my son and D-I-L, and other kids of their generation (they're both 30) it's how they communicate with their friends and co-workers, if not the older family units. They HAVE received a wedding invite via Facebook, and think nothing of it. Viva La Difference!

I might be OK with electronic invitations, depending on the form it took, but a facebook post is the modern equivalent of a yard sign. It's a mass broadcast, not an individual message. Postcards would be more personal.

sunny beach wrote:I might be OK with electronic invitations, depending on the form it took, but a facebook post is the modern equivalent of a yard sign. It's a mass broadcast, not an individual message. Postcards would be more personal.

Not necessarily true. Events (and posts, for that matter) can be directed to the public, friends (individually or as a group), friends of friends, groups, etc, etc. Sure, someone who isn't Facebook savvy might not figure out how to invite specific people to an event, or how to prevent it from being publicly viewable, but most of the people who would use it for evites do.

My point was the difference between individual messages, whatever the medium, and posting one collective announcement. There are valid reasons to use various communication channels, but a broadcast announcement is by definition not personal communication, even if distribution is restricted to some group.

If it helps, I'll change my comment to say a wedding invite posted on facebook in 2013 is analogous to a wedding invite emailed to a listserv fifteen years ago.

RoyGBiv wrote:I'm 1,000% ok with a simpler, less expensive invitation. Fancy engraved invitations are such a waste of $$. But it's possible to do something more inexpensively that looks nice and maintains the impression that the event is "special". A facebook invitation to a wedding is more casual that I would ever think appropriate, unless the wedding is THAT casual (sandals on the beach, backyard BBQ, etc.). But, who am I to judge? if the bride and groom are happy, good for them. I'll keep my lip zippered.

Custom invitations can cost less than a birthday card.

There are people in some circles that live through Facebook. I'm not condoning it or saying that what they are doing is right but that is just the way they choose to live. If we got a wedding invitation through Facebook, I might shake my head and mutter to myself but, in the end, I won't see it as any worse than a lot of other things that happen on FB. Social media has taken a lot more humanity than that out of our society but railing against it isn't going to change anything.

Some of the weddings that I have seen pictures of indicate that sandals on the beach would be a step. Everybody to their own. I happen to believe that weddings belong in a church but a very small percentage of the weddings taking place reflect that belief.

I don't go to weddings. In fact, I'd rather go to a funeral than a wedding. As a preacher friend that agreed with me once said, "Unlike weddings, a funeral is a ministry opportunity and it sticks".
That being said, I hate the commercialization of life events. If I had to go to a wedding, I'd much rather the person inviting me put a hand on my shoulder and say "I sure would like it if you would come to my wedding in my backyard wearing your jeans and cowboy boots". That would mean a lot more to me than a fancy invite in the mail for a wedding I have to go buy a suit for because I can't get in the fancy ball room without one.
So, chances are if I got an invite in the mail my wife would go without me and if I got one on Facebook it would probably be ignored.
I doubt seriously that I have come anywhere close to answering the question.

I registered my first .com domain more than twenty years ago, so my perspective may be atypical, but I believe a facebook invitation would be entirely appropriate if they want people to watch a live stream of the wedding. However, if they desire physical attendance, it seems the invitation should likewise have physical form.

Common-Law is the way to go!

No invitations to deal with. No guests to deal with. No rehearsal dinners. No renting a place for the reception. No bands to hire....

jmra wrote:I don't go to weddings. In fact, I'd rather go to a funeral than a wedding.

At least with funerals, once you've been to one for somebody, you can be pretty sure you won't be back for another in a few years.

jmra wrote:I don't go to weddings. In fact, I'd rather go to a funeral than a wedding. As a preacher friend that agreed with me once said, "Unlike weddings, a funeral is a ministry opportunity and it sticks".
That being said, I hate the commercialization of life events. If I had to go to a wedding, I'd much rather the person inviting me put a hand on my shoulder and say "I sure would like it if you would come to my wedding in my backyard wearing your jeans and cowboy boots". That would mean a lot more to me than a fancy invite in the mail for a wedding I have to go buy a suit for because I can't get in the fancy ball room without one.
So, chances are if I got an invite in the mail my wife would go without me and if I got one on Facebook it would probably be ignored.
I doubt seriously that I have come anywhere close to answering the question.

Veering off slightly off topic, our son was re-married on June 29th. I think that the minister who conducted the ceremony used it to reaffirm marriage as an institution of God and for many of us, including my wife and I who will be married 43 years in December, it stuck. If the ceremony consists of just the standard words, is impact is limited. But this one went far beyond that. I didn't expect to be impressed but I really was.

I'd agree that nothing beats an eye ball to eye ball request. That isn't always possible, given the distances that many invitations have cover. The determining factor in the response to the invitation, at least for me, is whether you truly want to be there to be part of the celebration or not. I hate for the spirit and intent to take a back seat to the messaging, regardless of how it arrives. We, who believe in marriage, need to take every possible chance to reaffirm its position in our society. Too many want to dismiss it as a piece of paper from a governmental clerk. Just my $.02.

chasfm11 wrote:

jmra wrote:I don't go to weddings. In fact, I'd rather go to a funeral than a wedding. As a preacher friend that agreed with me once said, "Unlike weddings, a funeral is a ministry opportunity and it sticks".
That being said, I hate the commercialization of life events. If I had to go to a wedding, I'd much rather the person inviting me put a hand on my shoulder and say "I sure would like it if you would come to my wedding in my backyard wearing your jeans and cowboy boots". That would mean a lot more to me than a fancy invite in the mail for a wedding I have to go buy a suit for because I can't get in the fancy ball room without one.
So, chances are if I got an invite in the mail my wife would go without me and if I got one on Facebook it would probably be ignored.
I doubt seriously that I have come anywhere close to answering the question.

Veering off slightly off topic, our son was re-married on June 29th. I think that the minister who conducted the ceremony used it to reaffirm marriage as an institution of God and for many of us, including my wife and I who will be married 43 years in December, it stuck. If the ceremony consists of just the standard words, is impact is limited. But this one went far beyond that. I didn't expect to be impressed but I really was.

I'd agree that nothing beats an eye ball to eye ball request. That isn't always possible, given the distances that many invitations have cover. The determining factor in the response to the invitation, at least for me, is whether you truly want to be there to be part of the celebration or not. I hate for the spirit and intent to take a back seat to the messaging, regardless of how it arrives. We, who believe in marriage, need to take every possible chance to reaffirm its position in our society. Too many want to dismiss it as a piece of paper from a governmental clerk. Just my $.02.

No argument here. I told my wife before we got married that divorce was not an option. She agreed wholeheartedly. Of course I was taken back somewhat when she asked me how I felt about murder.