Limited Seating for Family; Who gets Priority?

mrs4everhart

mysticl said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice.

For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short.

I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc.

Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next.

After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated.

Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation.

Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

mysticl

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice. For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short. I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc. Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next. After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated. Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation. Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to plenty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

mrs4everhart

mysticl said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

mysticl said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice.

For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short.

I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc.

Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next.

After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated.

Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation.

Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to ple
nty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

It would seem the OP liked her venue enough to not worry so much about how others spend 20 minutes of their day. And there's not a thing she can do now but proceed as best she can with the information she has.

I would have to opine that if all one's guests can hear is their officiant that goes down as a wedding fail. I would be annoyed if I sat through a wedding ceremony I couldn't hear. I don't need to watch anyone stare at their soon to be spouse.

chibiyui

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice. For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short. I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc. Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next. After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated. Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation. Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to ple nty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

It would seem the OP liked her venue enough to not worry so much about how others spend 20 minutes of their day. And there's not a thing she can do now but proceed as best she can with the information she has. I would have to opine that if all one's guests can hear is their officiant that goes down as a wedding fail. I would be annoyed if I sat through a wedding ceremony I couldn't hear. I don't need to watch anyone stare at their soon to be spouse.

Not to continue the snark train for the sake of snarking, but, if the OP valued her venue over her guests up until this point, why the fuck should she start caring now? Sometimes bad planning leads to bad weddings. Consequences have actions. 3 weeks before your wedding is too fucking little, too fucking late as far as this is concerned.

Viczaesar

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice. For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short. I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc. Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next. After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated. Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation. Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to ple nty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

It would seem the OP liked her venue enough to not worry so much about how others spend 20 minutes of their day. And there's not a thing she can do now but proceed as best she can with the information she has. I would have to opine that if all one's guests can hear is their officiant that goes down as a wedding fail. I would be annoyed if I sat through a wedding ceremony I couldn't hear. I don't need to watch anyone stare at their soon to be spouse.

 That's one hell of a euphemism for "OP doesn't give a shit about not providing seats to all of her guests at her wedding." 

Let me just make sure I understand you - you would consider it a wedding fail if you couldn't hear the bride and groom say their vows, but not a wedding fail if the majority of her guests had to choose between being able to sit but not able to see the ceremony and being able to see the ceremony and having to stand (more than 20 minutes, since they'll be standing around both before and after the ceremony actually starts)?

MobKaz

Viczaesar said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice. For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short. I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc. Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next. After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated. Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation. Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to ple nty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

It would seem the OP liked her venue enough to not worry so much about how others spend 20 minutes of their day. And there's not a thing she can do now but proceed as best she can with the information she has. I would have to opine that if all one's guests can hear is their officiant that goes down as a wedding fail. I would be annoyed if I sat through a wedding ceremony I couldn't hear. I don't need to watch anyone stare at their soon to be spouse.

 That's one hell of a euphemism for "OP doesn't give a shit about not providing seats to all of her guests at her wedding." 

Let me just make sure I understand you - you would consider it a wedding fail if you couldn't hear the bride and groom say their vows, but not a wedding fail if the majority of her guests had to choose between being able to sit but not able to see the ceremony and being able to see the ceremony and having to stand (more than 20 minutes, since they'll be standing around both before and after the ceremony actually starts)?

We have all seen her skills at creating euphemisms when it pertains to lying.  It does not surprise me that she extends that talent to other areas of her life.

OP makes it clear that she was well aware of her venue situation prior to booking it because she said, "I don't have a problem with people standing. I've been to a wedding at this venue before and it was not an issue."  It is clear she put her venue ahead of guests.  She put herself ahead of her guests.  She has had all the information she needed from the start.

mrs4everhart

MobKaz said:

Viczaesar said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice. For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short. I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc. Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next. After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated. Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation. Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to ple nty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

It would seem the OP liked her venue enough to not worry so much about how others spend 20 minutes of their day. And there's not a thing she can do now but proceed as best she can with the information she has. I would have to opine that if all one's guests can hear is their officiant that goes down as a wedding fail. I would be annoyed if I sat through a wedding ceremony I couldn't hear. I don't need to watch anyone stare at their soon to be spouse.

 That's one hell of a euphemism for "OP doesn't give a shit about not providing seats to all of her guests at her wedding." 

Let me just make sure I understand you - you would consider it a wedding fail if you couldn't hear the bride and groom say their vows, but not a wedding fail if the majority of her guests had to choose between being able to sit but not able to see the ceremony and being able to see the ceremony and having to stand (more than 20 minutes, since they'll be standing around both before and after the ceremony actually starts)?

We have all seen her skills at creating euphemisms when it pertains to lying.  It does not surprise me that she extends that talent to other areas of her life.

OP makes it clear that she was well aware of her venue situation prior to booking it because she said, "I don't have a problem with people standing. I've been to a wedding at this venue before and it was not an issue."  It is clear she put her venue ahead of guests.  She put herself ahead of her guests.  She has had all the information she needed from the start.

Ummmmmm, not sure if y'all realize this or not, but my statement wasn't a euphemism. It was just a statement. Referring to a not-so-bright person as "not the sharpest knife in the drawer" THAT'S a euphemism. 

It doesn't seem like a well guarded secret that the OP liked her venue more than she was concerned about the seating needs of others - she booked it!

To throw the baby out with the bath water and not concern herself with what she's going to do with the 32 seats that are available seems silly to me. If I were in her position I would seat people as I recommended. She's not going to scrap a venue she loves three weeks out but to think she's going to let those seats turn in to a weird game of Musical Chairs isn't really feasible either. 

This pervasive attitude that once one etiquette rule is disregarded, for whatever reason, that all hope is lost is just ridiculous. So some people will have to stand at OP's wedding. Some may bitch and grumble. All will get over it. Life will go on. 

chibiyui

STBMrsEverhart said:

MobKaz said:

Viczaesar said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice. For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short. I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc. Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next. After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated. Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation. Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to ple nty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

It would seem the OP liked her venue enough to not worry so much about how others spend 20 minutes of their day. And there's not a thing she can do now but proceed as best she can with the information she has. I would have to opine that if all one's guests can hear is their officiant that goes down as a wedding fail. I would be annoyed if I sat through a wedding ceremony I couldn't hear. I don't need to watch anyone stare at their soon to be spouse.

 That's one hell of a euphemism for "OP doesn't give a shit about not providing seats to all of her guests at her wedding." 

Let me just make sure I understand you - you would consider it a wedding fail if you couldn't hear the bride and groom say their vows, but not a wedding fail if the majority of her guests had to choose between being able to sit but not able to see the ceremony and being able to see the ceremony and having to stand (more than 20 minutes, since they'll be standing around both before and after the ceremony actually starts)?

We have all seen her skills at creating euphemisms when it pertains to lying.  It does not surprise me that she extends that talent to other areas of her life.

OP makes it clear that she was well aware of her venue situation prior to booking it because she said, "I don't have a problem with people standing. I've been to a wedding at this venue before and it was not an issue."  It is clear she put her venue ahead of guests.  She put herself ahead of her guests.  She has had all the information she needed from the start.

Ummmmmm, not sure if y'all realize this or not, but my statement wasn't a euphemism. It was just a statement. Referring to a not-so-bright person as "not the sharpest knife in the drawer" THAT'S a euphemism. 

It doesn't seem like a well guarded secret that the OP liked her venue more than she was concerned about the seating needs of others - she booked it!

To throw the baby out with the bath water and not concern herself with what she's going to do with the 32 seats that are available seems silly to me. If I were in her position I would seat people as I recommended. She's not going to scrap a venue she loves three weeks out but to think she's going to let those seats turn in to a weird game of Musical Chairs isn't really feasible either. 

This pervasive attitude that once one etiquette rule is disregarded, for whatever reason, that all hope is lost is just ridiculous. So some people will have to stand at OP's wedding. Some may bitch and grumble. All will get over it. Life will go on. 

In that case the OP should assign seats based on favoritism. Don't like MIL to be, fuck you bitch, you can stand with the rest of the peons that the OP doesn't give a shit about.

Viczaesar

STBMrsEverhart said:

MobKaz said:

Viczaesar said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice. For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short. I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc. Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next. After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated. Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation. Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to ple nty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

It would seem the OP liked her venue enough to not worry so much about how others spend 20 minutes of their day. And there's not a thing she can do now but proceed as best she can with the information she has. I would have to opine that if all one's guests can hear is their officiant that goes down as a wedding fail. I would be annoyed if I sat through a wedding ceremony I couldn't hear. I don't need to watch anyone stare at their soon to be spouse.

 That's one hell of a euphemism for "OP doesn't give a shit about not providing seats to all of her guests at her wedding." 

Let me just make sure I understand you - you would consider it a wedding fail if you couldn't hear the bride and groom say their vows, but not a wedding fail if the majority of her guests had to choose between being able to sit but not able to see the ceremony and being able to see the ceremony and having to stand (more than 20 minutes, since they'll be standing around both before and after the ceremony actually starts)?

We have all seen her skills at creating euphemisms when it pertains to lying.  It does not surprise me that she extends that talent to other areas of her life.

OP makes it clear that she was well aware of her venue situation prior to booking it because she said, "I don't have a problem with people standing. I've been to a wedding at this venue before and it was not an issue."  It is clear she put her venue ahead of guests.  She put herself ahead of her guests.  She has had all the information she needed from the start.

Ummmmmm, not sure if y'all realize this or not, but my statement wasn't a euphemism. It was just a statement. Referring to a not-so-bright person as "not the sharpest knife in the drawer" THAT'S a euphemism. 

It doesn't seem like a well guarded secret that the OP liked her venue more than she was concerned about the seating needs of others - she booked it!

To throw the baby out with the bath water and not concern herself with what she's going to do with the 32 seats that are available seems silly to me. If I were in her position I would seat people as I recommended. She's not going to scrap a venue she loves three weeks out but to think she's going to let those seats turn in to a weird game of Musical Chairs isn't really feasible either. 

This pervasive attitude that once one etiquette rule is disregarded, for whatever reason, that all hope is lost is just ridiculous. So some people will have to stand at OP's wedding. Some may bitch and grumble. All will get over it. Life will go on. 

They're both euphemisms, actually.

Jen4948

STBMrsEverhart said:

MobKaz said:

Viczaesar said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice. For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short. I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc. Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next. After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated. Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation. Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to ple nty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

It would seem the OP liked her venue enough to not worry so much about how others spend 20 minutes of their day. And there's not a thing she can do now but proceed as best she can with the information she has. I would have to opine that if all one's guests can hear is their officiant that goes down as a wedding fail. I would be annoyed if I sat through a wedding ceremony I couldn't hear. I don't need to watch anyone stare at their soon to be spouse.

 That's one hell of a euphemism for "OP doesn't give a shit about not providing seats to all of her guests at her wedding." 

Let me just make sure I understand you - you would consider it a wedding fail if you couldn't hear the bride and groom say their vows, but not a wedding fail if the majority of her guests had to choose between being able to sit but not able to see the ceremony and being able to see the ceremony and having to stand (more than 20 minutes, since they'll be standing around both before and after the ceremony actually starts)?

We have all seen her skills at creating euphemisms when it pertains to lying.  It does not surprise me that she extends that talent to other areas of her life.

OP makes it clear that she was well aware of her venue situation prior to booking it because she said, "I don't have a problem with people standing. I've been to a wedding at this venue before and it was not an issue."  It is clear she put her venue ahead of guests.  She put herself ahead of her guests.  She has had all the information she needed from the start.

Ummmmmm, not sure if y'all realize this or not, but my statement wasn't a euphemism. It was just a statement. Referring to a not-so-bright person as "not the sharpest knife in the drawer" THAT'S a euphemism. 

It doesn't seem like a well guarded secret that the OP liked her venue more than she was concerned about the seating needs of others - she booked it!

To throw the baby out with the bath water and not concern herself with what she's going to do with the 32 seats that are available seems silly to me. If I were in her position I would seat people as I recommended. She's not going to scrap a venue she loves three weeks out but to think she's going to let those seats turn in to a weird game of Musical Chairs isn't really feasible either. 

This pervasive attitude that once one etiquette rule is disregarded, for whatever reason, that all hope is lost is just ridiculous. So some people will have to stand at OP's wedding. Some may bitch and grumble. All will get over it. Life will go on. 

If anything causes people to bitch and grumble at a wedding, it's having to stand.  Seating is one of the most basic needs guests have, and not to provide enough is really, really bad hosting.  It's probably one of the biggest errors any hosts can make, and "All will get over it.  Life will go on" means "I don't give a fucking damn about the guests who took the time out of their lives to come and see me at my big event." 

Etiquette is there for a reason: to regulate social behavior so that when everyone is following the rules, everyone is comfortable.  Too bad you don't get that.

mrs4everhart

chibiyui said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

MobKaz said:

Viczaesar said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice. For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short. I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc. Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next. After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated. Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation. Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to ple nty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

It would seem the OP liked her venue enough to not worry so much about how others spend 20 minutes of their day. And there's not a thing she can do now but proceed as best she can with the information she has. I would have to opine that if all one's guests can hear is their officiant that goes down as a wedding fail. I would be annoyed if I sat through a wedding ceremony I couldn't hear. I don't need to watch anyone stare at their soon to be spouse.

 That's one hell of a euphemism for "OP doesn't give a shit about not providing seats to all of her guests at her wedding." 

Let me just make sure I understand you - you would consider it a wedding fail if you couldn't hear the bride and groom say their vows, but not a wedding fail if the majority of her guests had to choose between being able to sit but not able to see the ceremony and being able to see the ceremony and having to stand (more than 20 minutes, since they'll be standing around both before and after the ceremony actually starts)?

We have all seen her skills at creating euphemisms when it pertains to lying.  It does not surprise me that she extends that talent to other areas of her life.

OP makes it clear that she was well aware of her venue situation prior to booking it because she said, "I don't have a problem with people standing. I've been to a wedding at this venue before and it was not an issue."  It is clear she put her venue ahead of guests.  She put herself ahead of her guests.  She has had all the information she needed from the start.

Ummmmmm, not sure if y'all realize this or not, but my statement wasn't a euphemism. It was just a statement. Referring to a not-so-bright person as "not the sharpest knife in the drawer" THAT'S a euphemism. 

It doesn't seem like a well guarded secret that the OP liked her venue more than she was concerned about the seating needs of others - she booked it!

To throw the baby out with the bath water and not concern herself with what she's going to do with the 32 seats that are available seems silly to me. If I were in her position I would seat people as I recommended. She's not going to scrap a venue she loves three weeks out but to think she's going to let those seats turn in to a weird game of Musical Chairs isn't really feasible either. 

This pervasive attitude that once one etiquette rule is disregarded, for whatever reason, that all hope is lost is just ridiculous. So some people will have to stand at OP's wedding. Some may bitch and grumble. All will get over it. Life will go on. 

In that case the OP should assign seats based on favoritism. Don't like MIL to be, fuck you bitch, you can stand with the rest of the peons that the OP doesn't give a shit about.

It might not be a popular solution, but it is an option. 

mrs4everhart

Jen4948 said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

MobKaz said:

Viczaesar said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice. For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short. I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc. Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next. After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated. Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation. Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to ple nty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

It would seem the OP liked her venue enough to not worry so much about how others spend 20 minutes of their day. And there's not a thing she can do now but proceed as best she can with the information she has. I would have to opine that if all one's guests can hear is their officiant that goes down as a wedding fail. I would be annoyed if I sat through a wedding ceremony I couldn't hear. I don't need to watch anyone stare at their soon to be spouse.

 That's one hell of a euphemism for "OP doesn't give a shit about not providing seats to all of her guests at her wedding." 

Let me just make sure I understand you - you would consider it a wedding fail if you couldn't hear the bride and groom say their vows, but not a wedding fail if the majority of her guests had to choose between being able to sit but not able to see the ceremony and being able to see the ceremony and having to stand (more than 20 minutes, since they'll be standing around both before and after the ceremony actually starts)?

We have all seen her skills at creating euphemisms when it pertains to lying.  It does not surprise me that she extends that talent to other areas of her life.

OP makes it clear that she was well aware of her venue situation prior to booking it because she said, "I don't have a problem with people standing. I've been to a wedding at this venue before and it was not an issue."  It is clear she put her venue ahead of guests.  She put herself ahead of her guests.  She has had all the information she needed from the start.

Ummmmmm, not sure if y'all realize this or not, but my statement wasn't a euphemism. It was just a statement. Referring to a not-so-bright person as "not the sharpest knife in the drawer" THAT'S a euphemism. 

It doesn't seem like a well guarded secret that the OP liked her venue more than she was concerned about the seating needs of others - she booked it!

To throw the baby out with the bath water and not concern herself with what she's going to do with the 32 seats that are available seems silly to me. If I were in her position I would seat people as I recommended. She's not going to scrap a venue she loves three weeks out but to think she's going to let those seats turn in to a weird game of Musical Chairs isn't really feasible either. 

This pervasive attitude that once one etiquette rule is disregarded, for whatever reason, that all hope is lost is just ridiculous. So some people will have to stand at OP's wedding. Some may bitch and grumble. All will get over it. Life will go on. 

If anything causes people to bitch and grumble at a wedding, it's having to stand.  Seating is one of the most basic needs guests have, and not to provide enough is really, really bad hosting.  It's probably one of the biggest errors any hosts can make, and "All will get over it.  Life will go on" means "I don't give a fucking damn about the guests who took the time out of their lives to come and see me at my big event." 

Etiquette is there for a reason: to regulate social behavior so that when everyone is following the rules, everyone is comfortable.  Too bad you don't get that.

HA! The only thing I don't get is anyone telling someone that three weeks out they should find a new venue or just fuck it all! That's not even a possibility as I think everyone well knows. 

What she could or should have done is a ship sailed already. What she can still do is limited and was what she was asking advice on. Changing her venue is not viable. Figuring out a seating arrangement with the seats she has available is. 

As for me, I've never thrown a bad party. Or wedding for that matter, having one previous under my belt already. I'm not worried that people won't enjoy themselves at any event I throw, and generally seating is at the top of my list. 

MobKaz

STBMrsEverhart said:

Jen4948 said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

MobKaz said:

Viczaesar said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice. For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short. I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc. Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next. After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated. Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation. Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to ple nty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

It would seem the OP liked her venue enough to not worry so much about how others spend 20 minutes of their day. And there's not a thing she can do now but proceed as best she can with the information she has. I would have to opine that if all one's guests can hear is their officiant that goes down as a wedding fail. I would be annoyed if I sat through a wedding ceremony I couldn't hear. I don't need to watch anyone stare at their soon to be spouse.

 That's one hell of a euphemism for "OP doesn't give a shit about not providing seats to all of her guests at her wedding." 

Let me just make sure I understand you - you would consider it a wedding fail if you couldn't hear the bride and groom say their vows, but not a wedding fail if the majority of her guests had to choose between being able to sit but not able to see the ceremony and being able to see the ceremony and having to stand (more than 20 minutes, since they'll be standing around both before and after the ceremony actually starts)?

We have all seen her skills at creating euphemisms when it pertains to lying.  It does not surprise me that she extends that talent to other areas of her life.

OP makes it clear that she was well aware of her venue situation prior to booking it because she said, "I don't have a problem with people standing. I've been to a wedding at this venue before and it was not an issue."  It is clear she put her venue ahead of guests.  She put herself ahead of her guests.  She has had all the information she needed from the start.

Ummmmmm, not sure if y'all realize this or not, but my statement wasn't a euphemism. It was just a statement. Referring to a not-so-bright person as "not the sharpest knife in the drawer" THAT'S a euphemism. 

It doesn't seem like a well guarded secret that the OP liked her venue more than she was concerned about the seating needs of others - she booked it!

To throw the baby out with the bath water and not concern herself with what she's going to do with the 32 seats that are available seems silly to me. If I were in her position I would seat people as I recommended. She's not going to scrap a venue she loves three weeks out but to think she's going to let those seats turn in to a weird game of Musical Chairs isn't really feasible either. 

This pervasive attitude that once one etiquette rule is disregarded, for whatever reason, that all hope is lost is just ridiculous. So some people will have to stand at OP's wedding. Some may bitch and grumble. All will get over it. Life will go on. 

If anything causes people to bitch and grumble at a wedding, it's having to stand.  Seating is one of the most basic needs guests have, and not to provide enough is really, really bad hosting.  It's probably one of the biggest errors any hosts can make, and "All will get over it.  Life will go on" means "I don't give a fucking damn about the guests who took the time out of their lives to come and see me at my big event." 

Etiquette is there for a reason: to regulate social behavior so that when everyone is following the rules, everyone is comfortable.  Too bad you don't get that.

HA! The only thing I don't get is anyone telling someone that three weeks out they should find a new venue or just fuck it all! That's not even a possibility as I think everyone well knows. 

What she could or should have done is a ship sailed already. What she can still do is limited and was what she was asking advice on. Changing her venue is not viable. Figuring out a seating arrangement with the seats she has available is. 

As for me, I've never thrown a bad party. Or wedding for that matter, having one  TWO previous under my belt already. I'm not worried that people won't enjoy themselves at any event I throw, and generally seating is at the top of my list. 

As always, it's always about you.

southernbelle0915

STBMrsEverhart said:

MobKaz said:

Viczaesar said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

OP, I hope you're still around bc I have no snark, only advice. For the sake of this discussion I'm going to assume you and your FI are paying bc delving in to wedding planning money politics is too much and the below advice may fall short. I would start with immediate family. They're going to be front row regardless of age, etc. Then the elderly. Anyone with known handicaps, injuries or physical limitations, etc. Preggos next. After that I'd consider leaving things open seating - first come, first seated. Regardless of whether some people find the lack of seating for all rude or not is irrelevant at this point - you're three weeks out and you made your choice and the venue won. And trust me, most able bodied people can stand for 15-20 minutes, it won't kill them. I've stood through several weddings, all outdoors, all with limited seating for the groups listed above and didn't give it much of a thought. Just make sure all of your guests can hear you.

So to get a seat people need to divulge private medical information?  With my first pregnancy I got horrible dizzy spells if I stood too long.  This started happening long before I was showing or was ready to let people know.  

Personally, I'd rather be able to sit than hear.  And since most of her guests are going to relegated to a balcony I'm guessing they won't here or see much of anything anyhow.  

If you were a guest at OP's wedding yes, I supposed you'd have been disclosing or standing given the realities if her seating situation. Perhaps there's a sound system they use so people on the balcony can hear too. Otherwise, what's the point in attending the ceremony as a guest?

But I'm guessing she didn't put on her invites "there's only 16 seats per side available for the ceremony so let me know if you have a documented medical condition that requires you sit down" so then I'd get there and what, announce to the entire wedding that I'm pregnant and need a seat?  Or maybe the person who only has one leg but doesn't advertise the fact now has to pull up their pant leg to show off the prosthesis.  The point is you may not know who has disabilities or physical limitations and you can't always tell by looking.  

As for the sound system, I've been to ple nty of weddings where there wasn't one or only the minister had a mic so you didn't hear much.   

It would seem the OP liked her venue enough to not worry so much about how others spend 20 minutes of their day. And there's not a thing she can do now but proceed as best she can with the information she has. I would have to opine that if all one's guests can hear is their officiant that goes down as a wedding fail. I would be annoyed if I sat through a wedding ceremony I couldn't hear. I don't need to watch anyone stare at their soon to be spouse.

 That's one hell of a euphemism for "OP doesn't give a shit about not providing seats to all of her guests at her wedding." 

Let me just make sure I understand you - you would consider it a wedding fail if you couldn't hear the bride and groom say their vows, but not a wedding fail if the majority of her guests had to choose between being able to sit but not able to see the ceremony and being able to see the ceremony and having to stand (more than 20 minutes, since they'll be standing around both before and after the ceremony actually starts)?

We have all seen her skills at creating euphemisms when it pertains to lying.  It does not surprise me that she extends that talent to other areas of her life.

OP makes it clear that she was well aware of her venue situation prior to booking it because she said, "I don't have a problem with people standing. I've been to a wedding at this venue before and it was not an issue."  It is clear she put her venue ahead of guests.  She put herself ahead of her guests.  She has had all the information she needed from the start.

Ummmmmm, not sure if y'all realize this or not, but my statement wasn't a euphemism. It was just a statement. Referring to a not-so-bright person as "not the sharpest knife in the drawer" THAT'S a euphemism. 

It doesn't seem like a well guarded secret that the OP liked her venue more than she was concerned about the seating needs of others - she booked it!

To throw the baby out with the bath water and not concern herself with what she's going to do with the 32 seats that are available seems silly to me. If I were in her position I would seat people as I recommended. She's not going to scrap a venue she loves three weeks out but to think she's going to let those seats turn in to a weird game of Musical Chairs isn't really feasible either. 

This pervasive attitude that once one etiquette rule is disregarded, for whatever reason, that all hope is lost is just ridiculous. So some people will have to stand at OP's wedding. Some may bitch and grumble. All will get over it. Life will go on. 

I know what you're saying about finding a solution. I don't think anyone is saying "all hope is lost" or "find a new venue 3 weeks out". 

However OP deals with this, the only way to truly make this bad planning right is to provide everyone with a chair. All kittens and rainbows delivery aside, that's what people are saying.

Two years ago, I went to a wedding in Texas in August (it was HOT). They had a tent with air conditioners - it worked great. Maybe that's an option. It's expensive, but at this point, bad choices have lead to a potentially expensive solution. Maybe moving it to another part of the house is an option. It really doesn't matter what she does as long as everyone can see the ceremony and has a chair. It's truly that simple.