Cash Bar

artbyallie

ETF: Boxes broke. I am agreeing with @banana468
This. Any event someone is having should be fully hosted. If you can't afford to provide alcohol for the entire event, you don't provide it at all. Running out is a faux pas, albeit an accidental one.

Butterflyz419

Food isn't served for the entire event. Once dessert has been served the hosts are under no obligation to continue to provide guests with any more food whatsoever, even if the event is going to last another two hours. The late night snack trend is a nice add on, not an etiquette requirement. You have given no reasons why failing to provide alcohol for all 5 hours (which is impossible at many venues anyway since they shut the bar down before the event ends) would be necessary as a matter of etiquette when providing food for 5 hours straight is not. You may consider it poor planning and I would expect someone to budget for each guest to have more than one drink just as you would expect each guest to have more than one hors d'oeuvre, but as long as no one has to open their wallet and some nonalcoholic beverage is available, I can see no violation of etiquette. You want to side-eye it? That's your right, but it doesn't make someone a bad host to limit something unnecessary to the guest's comfort like alcohol. 

beethery

Butterflyz419 said:

Food isn't served for the entire event. Once dessert has been served the hosts are under no obligation to continue to provide guests with any more food whatsoever, even if the event is going to last another two hours. The late night snack trend is a nice add on, not an etiquette requirement. You have given no reasons why failing to provide alcohol for all 5 hours (which is impossible at many venues anyway since they shut the bar down before the event ends) would be necessary as a matter of etiquette when providing food for 5 hours straight is not. You may consider it poor planning and I would expect someone to budget for each guest to have more than one drink just as you would expect each guest to have more than one hors d'oeuvre, but as long as no one has to open their wallet and some nonalcoholic beverage is available, I can see no violation of etiquette. You want to side-eye it? That's your right, but it doesn't make someone a bad host to limit something unnecessary to the guest's comfort like alcohol. 

• You do not understand why seating charts are necessary.
  
• You do not understand why having everyone match is not necessary.
  
• You do not understand why when the groom's parents don't chip in at the demands of the MOB is irrelevant to withholding pictures.
  
• You do not understand why gaps are evidence of poor planning.
  
• You do not understand why having a party purely for people to give you alcohol to use at the wedding, so that you don't have to pay for it, is terrible.
  
• You do not understand why asking someone to be a personal attendant and run around doing shit for you the day of the wedding as a position of honor is terrible.
  

You do not understand why being a poor planner, terrible host, and generally thoughtless person is bad.

That's cool.

And, how could we forget, you came into this post to back up why you think changing to cash bar after a certain amount is acceptable.

dcbride86

Butterflyz419 said:

Food isn't served for the entire event. Once dessert has been served the hosts are under no obligation to continue to provide guests with any more food whatsoever, even if the event is going to last another two hours. The late night snack trend is a nice add on, not an etiquette requirement. You have given no reasons why failing to provide alcohol for all 5 hours (which is impossible at many venues anyway since they shut the bar down before the event ends) would be necessary as a matter of etiquette when providing food for 5 hours straight is not. You may consider it poor planning and I would expect someone to budget for each guest to have more than one drink just as you would expect each guest to have more than one hors d'oeuvre, but as long as no one has to open their wallet and some nonalcoholic beverage is available, I can see no violation of etiquette. You want to side-eye it? That's your right, but it doesn't make someone a bad host to limit something unnecessary to the guest's comfort like alcohol. 

I'm unsure exactly what you mean by this.  At my venue, the event is "over" at the 5 hour mark.  Which means no more music or aocohol.  However, the hotel does allow people to use the restroom and mingle a bit more, and have a few more photos taken, before we oficially vacate.  During this time, there is no alcohol because the event is officially over - there are just a few stragglers.  I see no problem with this.  However, if the bar just closed up an hour or two before the event ended (while the band was still playing and everyone was still dancing), I would think that was very strange

yogablossom

Our bar, by law, has to shut down 30 minutes prior to the end of the event.  There is a "last call", per se. I am fine with this. We don't need people drinking right up to the very end of the reception. That, and we can do nothing about it, as it is Massachusetts state law.

dcbride86

yogablossom said:

Our bar, by law, has to shut down 30 minutes prior to the end of the event.  There is a "last call", per se. I am fine with this. We don't need people drinking right up to the very end of the reception. That, and we can do nothing about it, as it is Massachusetts state law.

Okay, this makes TOTAL sense to me.  It's different than a venue shutting down the bar like 2 hours in advance.  A lot of bars do a last call 30 minutes before the bar closes, so I wouldn't think anything of it.

yogablossom

@dcbride86 Definitely! I think of it like being in a bar in Boston or wherever, and they have last call before the bar closes...which is like 30 minutes before it actually closes. I figure, since it'll be an open bar, when they make last call, people can go pile up on their drinks if they want to. If not, I'm sure they wont miss that extra 30 minutes because they probably have a drink in their hand anyway at last call.

LondonLisa

Butterflyz419 said:

Food isn't served for the entire event. Once dessert has been served the hosts are under no obligation to continue to provide guests with any more food whatsoever, even if the event is going to last another two hours. The late night snack trend is a nice add on, not an etiquette requirement. You have given no reasons why failing to provide alcohol for all 5 hours (which is impossible at many venues anyway since they shut the bar down before the event ends) would be necessary as a matter of etiquette when providing food for 5 hours straight is not. You may consider it poor planning and I would expect someone to budget for each guest to have more than one drink just as you would expect each guest to have more than one hors d'oeuvre, but as long as no one has to open their wallet and some nonalcoholic beverage is available, I can see no violation of etiquette. You want to side-eye it? That's your right, but it doesn't make someone a bad host to limit something unnecessary to the guest's comfort like alcohol. 

Look, you refuse to believe what you are doing is wrong, but it unequivocally is. We have no vested interest in your wedding, and I can 100% guarantee your guests agree with us (but will of course never say it to your face, they have manners). 

Drinks are provided throughout the night, food is provided as either a meal or through some sort of non-meal buffet (depending on time). Your analogy would be pulling away someone's plate of food when they were half-way finished with their meal, or else running out of food when everyone hasn't had enough. Look on here and you can easily find SO many places where people say "the wedding was horrible because they didn't plan well and ran out of food". 

Why do you insist on doing it this way when you could easily have just beer and wine the whole night? It is almost like you want to punish your guests to prove to us that it isn't rude. Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face.

PS: I don't think anyone has a problem with the bar closing 30 minutes before the end of reception for last call, but when the  bar closes, that signals the night is over and I am going to get my purse and coat. If the bar closed 3 hours before the planned end of reception, everyone will think THAT is when the party is over. 

Maggie0829

yogablossom said:

Our bar, by law, has to shut down 30 minutes prior to the end of the event.  There is a "last call", per se. I am fine with this. We don't need people drinking right up to the very end of the reception. That, and we can do nothing about it, as it is Massachusetts state law.

A lot of venues are like this.  It is a venue rule/state law, it isn't like you as the host are making the decision to shut down the bar an hour or two before the end of your reception because you are A) didn't budget properly or are trying to control how much your guests are drinking.

Fran1985

Butterflyz419 said:

Food isn't served for the entire event. Once dessert has been served the hosts are under no obligation to continue to provide guests with any more food whatsoever, even if the event is going to last another two hours. The late night snack trend is a nice add on, not an etiquette requirement. You have given no reasons why failing to provide alcohol for all 5 hours (which is impossible at many venues anyway since they shut the bar down before the event ends) would be necessary as a matter of etiquette when providing food for 5 hours straight is not. You may consider it poor planning and I would expect someone to budget for each guest to have more than one drink just as you would expect each guest to have more than one hors d'oeuvre, but as long as no one has to open their wallet and some nonalcoholic beverage is available, I can see no violation of etiquette. You want to side-eye it? That's your right, but it doesn't make someone a bad host to limit something unnecessary to the guest's comfort like alcohol. 

You must be purposefully being obtuse. Your analogy is comparing the wrong things- having a cash bar like this isn't equivalent to serving food for 5 hours. Its the equivalent of having a buffet and buying a set amount of food instead of paying per head, so that some portion of your guests get up to line and instead of the chicken dish, there is only salad left. No one is talking about closing the bar early to shut down (ie stop serving at 930 when the event ends at 10). That's perfectly fine and its also planned. What you are suggesting is poor planning and poor hosting

huskypuppy14

yogablossom said:

Our bar, by law, has to shut down 30 minutes prior to the end of the event.  There is a "last call", per se. I am fine with this. We don't need people drinking right up to the very end of the reception. That, and we can do nothing about it, as it is Massachusetts state law.

It's venue specific. The bar was open until the very end of my reception (11pm). There was no reason to shut down, because people were just going to the after party in the same venue, just a different building, where there was also a bar. 

lovegood90

Knottie32752756 said:

I feel like I have seen this same post with the same results come up over and over on this board with the same results. One person asking a question and the same few slamming it down and demanding the only two options are open bar all night long or dry wedding. Now I understand the logic and etiquette of both sides even though personally I disagree. What would be nice if possible moderators would be if a poll or somethin could be established that May grant some insight to both sides and give those a voice that are too shy to post. Maybe something along the lines of asking a guest if an open bar was not an option for the couple would they prefer to attend a dry wedding or have the option to buy? Just a thought as reading the same thing and having it repeatedly shot down while watching everyone bicker like children all though amusing is redundant.

The reason that this happens is because etiquette is not a matter of opinion. Making your guests open their wallets at an event that they are not hosting is not proper etiquette. It's just not. This isn't always a place for people to say what they think about if something is or is not etiquette-approved. A huge purpose of this board is for us to give people who post questions the proper etiquette advice, and to acknowledge when someone is giving the wrong advice. In this case, that's why you are seeing tons of "cash bars are against etiquette" posts and people "shooting down" the cash bar advocates.

dcbride86

Is there etiquette about whether or not you need to communicate whether its a dry wedding ahead of time? 

I only ask because FI and I like to drink, but would never drive drunk.  So if a wedding was, say, 1 hour away, we would get a hotel because we would anticipate drinking.  If the wedding was dry, we would certainly be annoyed if we didn't know ahead of time, because if we knew we would be totally sobes, we would have saved money on a hotel and driven home.

Just wondering.  This has never happened (and my wedding will be 100% open bar), but I'm curious

Maggie0829

Knottie32752756 said:

I feel like I have seen this same post with the same results come up over and over on this board with the same results. One person asking a question and the same few slamming it down and demanding the only two options are open bar all night long or dry wedding. Now I understand the logic and etiquette of both sides even though personally I disagree. What would be nice if possible moderators would be if a poll or somethin could be established that May grant some insight to both sides and give those a voice that are too shy to post. Maybe something along the lines of asking a guest if an open bar was not an option for the couple would they prefer to attend a dry wedding or have the option to buy? Just a thought as reading the same thing and having it repeatedly shot down while watching everyone bicker like children all though amusing is redundant.

Well seeing as this is a discussion forum, anyone is free to offer their insight.  But I have yet to read a post that is pro-cash bar that in anyway makes sense.  Please tell me how making your guests pay for anything at your wedding is a good thing.

As to the bolded, I am pretty sure we have had posts in the past with that exact question.  

climbingsingle

Special snowflakes - if you post on the ETIQUETTE board, you're going to get advice based on ETIQUETTE. This is not a matter of opinion. Etiquette rules are very clear. Cash bars are a no-no. If you want to serve alcohol, you need to serve it for the entire event (this obviously does not include venues that are required or have rules about shutting the bar down for the last 30 minutes of an event). 

Butterflyz419

beethery said:

Butterflyz419 said:

Food isn't served for the entire event. Once dessert has been served the hosts are under no obligation to continue to provide guests with any more food whatsoever, even if the event is going to last another two hours. The late night snack trend is a nice add on, not an etiquette requirement. You have given no reasons why failing to provide alcohol for all 5 hours (which is impossible at many venues anyway since they shut the bar down before the event ends) would be necessary as a matter of etiquette when providing food for 5 hours straight is not. You may consider it poor planning and I would expect someone to budget for each guest to have more than one drink just as you would expect each guest to have more than one hors d'oeuvre, but as long as no one has to open their wallet and some nonalcoholic beverage is available, I can see no violation of etiquette. You want to side-eye it? That's your right, but it doesn't make someone a bad host to limit something unnecessary to the guest's comfort like alcohol. 

• You do not understand why seating charts are necessary. NEVER SAID THAT.
  
• You do not understand why having everyone match is not necessary. NEVER SAID THAT.
  
• You do not understand why when the groom's parents don't chip in at the demands of the MOB is irrelevant to withholding pictures. NEVER SAID THAT.
  
• You do not understand why gaps are evidence of poor planning. Oooh, look you got one right. I don't care about gaps.
  
• You do not understand why having a party purely for people to give you alcohol to use at the wedding, so that you don't have to pay for it, is terrible.NEVER SAID THAT.
  
• You do not understand why asking someone to be a personal attendant and run around doing shit for you the day of the wedding as a position of honor is terrible. I'll give you half credit on this one. I do believe that it's completely okay to request assistance from friends even on your wedding day.
  

You do not understand why being a poor planner, terrible host, and generally thoughtless person is bad.

That's cool.

And, how could we forget, you came into this post to back up why you think changing to cash bar after a certain amount is acceptable. Not what I've been saying.

Reading comprehension. Get some.

Maggie0829

dcbride86 said:

Is there etiquette about whether or not you need to communicate whether its a dry wedding ahead of time? 

I only ask because FI and I like to drink, but would never drive drunk.  So if a wedding was, say, 1 hour away, we would get a hotel because we would anticipate drinking.  If the wedding was dry, we would certainly be annoyed if we didn't know ahead of time, because if we knew we would be totally sobes, we would have saved money on a hotel and driven home.

Just wondering.  This has never happened (and my wedding will be 100% open bar), but I'm curious

No, you do not have to tell your guests anything about what is and is not being served.  Alcohol should not be expected.  Actually the only thing that should be expected is that you will be fed and watered the appropriate amount depending on the time and day.

dcbride86

Maggie0829 said:

dcbride86 said:

Is there etiquette about whether or not you need to communicate whether its a dry wedding ahead of time? 

I only ask because FI and I like to drink, but would never drive drunk.  So if a wedding was, say, 1 hour away, we would get a hotel because we would anticipate drinking.  If the wedding was dry, we would certainly be annoyed if we didn't know ahead of time, because if we knew we would be totally sobes, we would have saved money on a hotel and driven home.

Just wondering.  This has never happened (and my wedding will be 100% open bar), but I'm curious

No, you do not have to tell your guests anything about what is and is not being served.  Alcohol should not be expected.  Actually the only thing that should be expected is that you will be fed and watered the appropriate amount depending on the time and day.

Interesting.  I've never been to a dry wedding, but I was just wondering because of the hotel situation.  Good to know

misshart00

dcbride86 said:

Is there etiquette about whether or not you need to communicate whether its a dry wedding ahead of time? 

I only ask because FI and I like to drink, but would never drive drunk.  So if a wedding was, say, 1 hour away, we would get a hotel because we would anticipate drinking.  If the wedding was dry, we would certainly be annoyed if we didn't know ahead of time, because if we knew we would be totally sobes, we would have saved money on a hotel and driven home.

Just wondering.  This has never happened (and my wedding will be 100% open bar), but I'm curious

And to add to what Maggie said, as guests, it is rude to expect alcohol at a wedding.

dcbride86

misshart00 said:

Is there etiquette about whether or not you need to communicate whether its a dry wedding ahead of time? 

I only ask because FI and I like to drink, but would never drive drunk.  So if a wedding was, say, 1 hour away, we would get a hotel because we would anticipate drinking.  If the wedding was dry, we would certainly be annoyed if we didn't know ahead of time, because if we knew we would be totally sobes, we would have saved money on a hotel and driven home.

Just wondering.  This has never happened (and my wedding will be 100% open bar), but I'm curious

And to add to what Maggie said, as guests, it is rude to expect alcohol at a wedding.

Is it?  I mean, yes I get that for the most part, but is it weird to expect that friends with whom you often drink would let you know if their wedding was dry?  Again, I've never been in this situation, and most of the weddings I've attended I have known somehow that it would have an open bar (usually I know the bride and hear about planning).  It's just a totally random question I had

Butterflyz419

LondonLisa said:

Butterflyz419 said:

Food isn't served for the entire event. Once dessert has been served the hosts are under no obligation to continue to provide guests with any more food whatsoever, even if the event is going to last another two hours. The late night snack trend is a nice add on, not an etiquette requirement. You have given no reasons why failing to provide alcohol for all 5 hours (which is impossible at many venues anyway since they shut the bar down before the event ends) would be necessary as a matter of etiquette when providing food for 5 hours straight is not. You may consider it poor planning and I would expect someone to budget for each guest to have more than one drink just as you would expect each guest to have more than one hors d'oeuvre, but as long as no one has to open their wallet and some nonalcoholic beverage is available, I can see no violation of etiquette. You want to side-eye it? That's your right, but it doesn't make someone a bad host to limit something unnecessary to the guest's comfort like alcohol. 

Look, you refuse to believe what you are doing is wrong, but it unequivocally is. We have no vested interest in your wedding, and I can 100% guarantee your guests agree with us (but will of course never say it to your face, they have manners). 

Drinks are provided throughout the night, food is provided as either a meal or through some sort of non-meal buffet (depending on time). Your analogy would be pulling away someone's plate of food when they were half-way finished with their meal, or else running out of food when everyone hasn't had enough. Look on here and you can easily find SO many places where people say "the wedding was horrible because they didn't plan well and ran out of food". 

Why do you insist on doing it this way when you could easily have just beer and wine the whole night? It is almost like you want to punish your guests to prove to us that it isn't rude. Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face.

PS: I don't think anyone has a problem with the bar closing 30 minutes before the end of reception for last call, but when the  bar closes, that signals the night is over and I am going to get my purse and coat. If the bar closed 3 hours before the planned end of reception, everyone will think THAT is when the party is over. 

I've never said that I'm doing this or any of the other supposedly terrible things that I've defended on this board at my wedding. I've shared very little about my own wedding plans beyond the fact that my wedding is on a Sunday evening.

Oh and the whole just serve beer and wine the whole time? Yeah. Doesn't always work that way. At my venue, the cheap wine costs the same as the house spirits at $6 a glass so limiting to beer and wine would make no difference in cost.

I just get sick of seeing brides getting hammered on this board for absolutely no reason. I've still been given no reason by etiquette why you must serve alcohol for the entire event or not at all. If the alcoholic portion of the bar closes after a limit is reached, and as long as other non-alcoholic beverages continue to be available so no one gets dehydrated, your host duties are fulfilled.

beethery

@butterflyz419 that is all in your posting history. Maybe you ought to go back and read through so you don't contradict yourself any further. To clarify: You never said any of that verbatim, and I did not imply that those were direct quotes, I implied that you do not understand those concepts, because it is very clear that you don't.

Butterflyz419

beethery said:

@butterflyz419 that is all in your posting history. Maybe you ought to go back and read through so you don't contradict yourself any further.

I know exactly what I've said and what I've defended and what I haven't and I am not ashamed of a single thing I've posted and if anyone else wants to take their time reading all my old posts, go for it. Hopefully most of them will have better reading comprehension skills than yours.

Maggie0829

Knottie32752756 said:

So it's rude for guests to assume there is alcohol but not rude for them to expect that they can drink their fill if like the original poster said the bar had a limit?

What?

It is rude to expect anything specific at a wedding.  For example, it is rude to expect a steak and lobster dinner.  It is rude to expect top shelf liquor.  The only thing that you can expect is to be fed and watered properly for the time of day.

It is also rude of the hosts to say "oh we have a $2K limit on the bar so go all out but when that limit is reached then it is up to you to pay for your own drinks."

Maggie0829

dcbride86 said:

misshart00 said:

Is there etiquette about whether or not you need to communicate whether its a dry wedding ahead of time? 

I only ask because FI and I like to drink, but would never drive drunk.  So if a wedding was, say, 1 hour away, we would get a hotel because we would anticipate drinking.  If the wedding was dry, we would certainly be annoyed if we didn't know ahead of time, because if we knew we would be totally sobes, we would have saved money on a hotel and driven home.

Just wondering.  This has never happened (and my wedding will be 100% open bar), but I'm curious

And to add to what Maggie said, as guests, it is rude to expect alcohol at a wedding.

Is it?  I mean, yes I get that for the most part, but is it weird to expect that friends with whom you often drink would let you know if their wedding was dry?  Again, I've never been in this situation, and most of the weddings I've attended I have known somehow that it would have an open bar (usually I know the bride and hear about planning).  It's just a totally random question I had

Honestly, if these are friends that you typically drink with often and enjoy their alcohol then it is probably safe to assume that there will be alcohol at their wedding.  But it would not be rude of them to have a dry wedding and it would not be rude of them to not tell you that ahead of time. Alcohol is never a requirement.  For example I had multiple stations at my wedding.  I did not tell every guest what exactly we were serving in regards to food.  They found that out when they came to my wedding.  Same with the bar.  I didn't make a point in telling people we were having an open bar, they found that out when they arrived.

LondonLisa

Butterflyz419 said:

LondonLisa said:

Butterflyz419 said:

Food isn't served for the entire event. Once dessert has been served the hosts are under no obligation to continue to provide guests with any more food whatsoever, even if the event is going to last another two hours. The late night snack trend is a nice add on, not an etiquette requirement. You have given no reasons why failing to provide alcohol for all 5 hours (which is impossible at many venues anyway since they shut the bar down before the event ends) would be necessary as a matter of etiquette when providing food for 5 hours straight is not. You may consider it poor planning and I would expect someone to budget for each guest to have more than one drink just as you would expect each guest to have more than one hors d'oeuvre, but as long as no one has to open their wallet and some nonalcoholic beverage is available, I can see no violation of etiquette. You want to side-eye it? That's your right, but it doesn't make someone a bad host to limit something unnecessary to the guest's comfort like alcohol. 

Look, you refuse to believe what you are doing is wrong, but it unequivocally is. We have no vested interest in your wedding, and I can 100% guarantee your guests agree with us (but will of course never say it to your face, they have manners). 

Drinks are provided throughout the night, food is provided as either a meal or through some sort of non-meal buffet (depending on time). Your analogy would be pulling away someone's plate of food when they were half-way finished with their meal, or else running out of food when everyone hasn't had enough. Look on here and you can easily find SO many places where people say "the wedding was horrible because they didn't plan well and ran out of food". 

Why do you insist on doing it this way when you could easily have just beer and wine the whole night? It is almost like you want to punish your guests to prove to us that it isn't rude. Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face.

PS: I don't think anyone has a problem with the bar closing 30 minutes before the end of reception for last call, but when the  bar closes, that signals the night is over and I am going to get my purse and coat. If the bar closed 3 hours before the planned end of reception, everyone will think THAT is when the party is over. 

I've never said that I'm doing this or any of the other supposedly terrible things that I've defended on this board at my wedding. I've shared very little about my own wedding plans beyond the fact that my wedding is on a Sunday evening.

Oh and the whole just serve beer and wine the whole time? Yeah. Doesn't always work that way. At my venue, the cheap wine costs the same as the house spirits at $6 a glass so limiting to beer and wine would make no difference in cost.

I just get sick of seeing brides getting hammered on this board for absolutely no reason. I've still been given no reason by etiquette why you must serve alcohol for the entire event or not at all. If the alcoholic portion of the bar closes after a limit is reached, and as long as other non-alcoholic beverages continue to be available so no one gets dehydrated, your host duties are fulfilled.

Then you cannot afford your venue and you planned poorly. You should have either a.) picked a place that you can afford to host everyone properly or b.) held it at your venue and had a dry wedding. Don't punish your guests because you can't budget and plan properly. 

Running out of anything at a hosted event is rude and poor planning. The problem is beverages and food are different. If you are hosting drinks they need to stay the same the whole night. See the what I posted about above about the wedding I went to where they had this. 

southernbelle0915

Knottie32752756 said:

I feel like I have seen this same post with the same results come up over and over on this board with the same results. One person asking a question and the same few slamming it down and demanding the only two options are open bar all night long or dry wedding. Now I understand the logic and etiquette of both sides even though personally I disagree. What would be nice if possible moderators would be if a poll or somethin could be established that May grant some insight to both sides and give those a voice that are too shy to post. Maybe something along the lines of asking a guest if an open bar was not an option for the couple would they prefer to attend a dry wedding or have the option to buy? Just a thought as reading the same thing and having it repeatedly shot down while watching everyone bicker like children all though amusing is redundant.

Etiquette is not a matter of opinion or polling. 

Further, there's a difference between what guests might want to see at a wedding (i.e. alcohol) and the obligations of a host (to host what they can afford). The poll you're asking for is what a GUEST would want at a wedding. Not what a HOST's obligations are. 

This is an etiquette board. And 9 out of 10 "cash bar" threads are HOSTS asking about proper etiquette. Proper etiquette is super easy - host what you can afford and don't ask guests to supplement it. So. Easy. And there are creative ways to do it: host beer and wine; host just beer; host just wine; host a signature drink; have a dry wedding; etc. 

Where posters get into trouble is when they want more than they can afford - they want a full open bar. But they can't pay for it. So they're asking "can I ask guests to pay for it". And proper etiquette says "No, you can't - but here's what you CAN do." It's not a matter of opinion. 

eta dry wedding

beethery

Butterflyz419 said:

beethery said:

@butterflyz419 that is all in your posting history. Maybe you ought to go back and read through so you don't contradict yourself any further.

I know exactly what I've said and what I've defended and what I haven't and I am not ashamed of a single thing I've posted and if anyone else wants to take their time reading all my old posts, go for it. Hopefully most of them will have better reading comprehension skills than yours.

You don't have that many posts, most of them revolve around you showing up and defending garbage.

I know you're not ashamed of being alright with terrible hosting, poor planning, and being a thoughtless individual. You make that very clear by showing up to shit-stir time and time again.