Invites and Paper

Evites

2»

Re: Evites

  • edited August 2016
    Jen4948 said:
    @Ironring, none of us said that electronic means can't be used to communicate the logistical information in an invitation -- just that it shouldn't be the only means of communicating to guests that they're invited to a wedding.

    You might find it "hilarious," but the rest of us don't. We've all experienced things, including guests who are not internet-savvy and/or would not respect non-paper invitations, that make us leery of using Evites by themselves.
    I find your continued insistence that using evites would be this horrible thing (and your attitude) hilarious, not the question itself. Of course people who don't use/aren't savvy with email/internet are a different story. Obviously for those people it would actually be a bad idea and rude. 
    MobKaz
  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston
    10000 Comments Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
    member
    edited August 2016
    Ironring said:
    Jen4948 said:
    @Ironring, none of us said that electronic means can't be used to communicate the logistical information in an invitation -- just that it shouldn't be the only means of communicating to guests that they're invited to a wedding.

    You might find it "hilarious," but the rest of us don't. We've all experienced things, including guests who are not internet-savvy and/or would not respect non-paper invitations, that make us leery of using Evites by themselves.
    I find your continued insistence that using evites would be this horrible thing (and your attitude) hilarious, not the question itself. Of course people who don't use/aren't savvy with email/internet are a different story. Obviously for those people it would actually be a bad idea and rude. 

    Stuck in box

    Maybe the fact that we continue to insist on it should have clued you in that calling us and our attitude "hilarious" might mean that you're wrong? And that you're not scoring any points? If anything, you're acting like an immature teenager. Are you sure you're old enough even to get married?
  • edited August 2016
    @Jen4948, wow, really? That's definitely an unnecessary route to go, for a topic that isn't that big of a deal in the whole scheme of things. We are talking about invitations....purely just the means to get the event information and rsvps back from guests. But if we want to be petty for a moment, I wondered the same thing about you after reading your "sorrynotsorry" comment on the first page since I've only ever seen 18 year olds write that IRL. 

    I've agreed with you and everyone that they are tacky, we aren't in disagreement here. I was stating an opinion, which I am perfectly entitled to do. Other people have also stated that they also think they aren't necessarily rude or all that horrible in some instances. I will continue to stand by my position that for a one week, two week, whatever engagement length, paper invitations are not necessary. And I am allowed to do do. You are allowed to disagree. We can agree on this and we can agree that paper invitations are definitely much nicer than evites and it really doesn't need to continue to be a fight. 

    Eta: words. 
  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston
    10000 Comments Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
    member
    Ironring said:
    @Jen4948, wow, really? That's definitely an unnecessary route to go, for a topic that isn't that big of a deal in the whole scheme of things. We are talking about invitations....purely just the means to get the event information and rsvps back from guests. But if we want to be petty for a moment, I wondered the same thing about you after reading your "sorrynotsorry" comment on the first page since I've only ever seen 18 year olds write that IRL. 

    I've agreed with you and everyone that they are tacky, we aren't in disagreement here. I was stating an opinion, which I am perfectly entitled to do. Other people have also stated that they also think they aren't necessarily rude or all that horrible in some instances. I will continue to stand by my position that for a one week, two week, whatever engagement length, paper invitations are not necessary. And I am allowed to do do. You are allowed to disagree. We can agree on this and we can agree that paper invitations are definitely much nicer than evites and it really doesn't need to continue to be a fight. 

    Eta: words. 
    Look, expressing an opinion is one thing. 

    Yes, we can disagree. But just as you have the right to express your opinion, so do the rest of us. And just as you have the right to reiterate it, so do we.  

    If you really want there not to be any fighting, then accept that our opinions differ -- respectfully.  That means knock off calling those who disagree with you "hilarious." It's not working in your favor.
  • I'm seriosuly laughing about the idea that two weeks is enough time to design, print, address (hand written since its proper etiquette), send, wait for them to be delivered, give people time to RSVP, wait for RSVPs to be returned; really all in a two week time period?

    Yes evites for a wedding are tacky. But there are situations, including @ShesSoCold's above in which sending paper invites are not only not useful for disseminating information but they are a waste of time and money. 
    Well, I guess something written on a piece of paper trumps any and all possible life situations. If in doubt just move your wedding day, right?
                 
    ShesSoColdcharlotte989875DrillSergeantCatMairePoppy
  • MairePoppyMairePoppy Connecticut
    Moderator Eighth Anniversary 5000 Comments 500 Love Its
    mod
    I'm seriously laughing about the idea that two weeks is enough time to design, print, address (hand written since its proper etiquette), send, wait for them to be delivered, give people time to RSVP, wait for RSVPs to be returned; really all in a two week time period?

    Yes evites for a wedding are tacky. But there are situations, including @ShesSoCold's above in which sending paper invites are not only not useful for disseminating information but they are a waste of time and money. 
    Hey, don't laugh, it could be done. You could do a fill in the blank order on Staples, and I'm sure other stores, pick them up the next day. RSVPs are another story. The two week engagement was a hypothetical used for the sake of argument. But I do have to wonder why anyone is arguing, being that most of us agree with your point exactly.

    Of course if someone is gravely ill or dying, niceties be damned. Who would be cruel enough to argue otherwise?
                
    Jen4948DrillSergeantCatOurWildKingdomCMGragain
  • ViczaesarViczaesar Central Coast, CA
    Eighth Anniversary 5000 Comments 500 Love Its First Answer
    member
    Jen4948 said:
    Ironring said:
    @Jen4948, wow, really? That's definitely an unnecessary route to go, for a topic that isn't that big of a deal in the whole scheme of things. We are talking about invitations....purely just the means to get the event information and rsvps back from guests. But if we want to be petty for a moment, I wondered the same thing about you after reading your "sorrynotsorry" comment on the first page since I've only ever seen 18 year olds write that IRL. 

    I've agreed with you and everyone that they are tacky, we aren't in disagreement here. I was stating an opinion, which I am perfectly entitled to do. Other people have also stated that they also think they aren't necessarily rude or all that horrible in some instances. I will continue to stand by my position that for a one week, two week, whatever engagement length, paper invitations are not necessary. And I am allowed to do do. You are allowed to disagree. We can agree on this and we can agree that paper invitations are definitely much nicer than evites and it really doesn't need to continue to be a fight. 

    Eta: words. 
    Look, expressing an opinion is one thing. 

    Yes, we can disagree. But just as you have the right to express your opinion, so do the rest of us. And just as you have the right to reiterate it, so do we.  

    If you really want there not to be any fighting, then accept that our opinions differ -- respectfully.  That means knock off calling those who disagree with you "hilarious." It's not working in your favor.
    The only one I see not disagreeing respectfully here is you, Jen#s.



    redwoodoriginal
  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston
    10000 Comments Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
    member
    edited August 2016
    Viczaesar said:d
    Jen4948 said:
    Ironring said:
    @Jen4948, wow, really? That's definitely an unnecessary route to go, for a topic that isn't that big of a deal in the whole scheme of things. We are talking about invitations....purely just the means to get the event information and rsvps back from guests. But if we want to be petty for a moment, I wondered the same thing about you after reading your "sorrynotsorry" comment on the first page since I've only ever seen 18 year olds write that IRL. 

    I've agreed with you and everyone that they are tacky, we aren't in disagreement here. I was stating an opinion, which I am perfectly entitled to do. Other people have also stated that they also think they aren't necessarily rude or all that horrible in some instances. I will continue to stand by my position that for a one week, two week, whatever engagement length, paper invitations are not necessary. And I am allowed to do do. You are allowed to disagree. We can agree on this and we can agree that paper invitations are definitely much nicer than evites and it really doesn't need to continue to be a fight. 

    Eta: words. 
    Look, expressing an opinion is one thing. 

    Yes, we can disagree. But just as you have the right to express your opinion, so do the rest of us. And just as you have the right to reiterate it, so do we.  

    If you really want there not to be any fighting, then accept that our opinions differ -- respectfully.  That means knock off calling those who disagree with you "hilarious." It's not working in your favor.
    The only one I see not disagreeing respectfully here is you, Jen#s.

    Go look in a mirror.
  • 'The last word' is also the name of a yummy sounding cocktail. Jen#'s why not make yourself one, because your comebacks are terrible.


                 
    MobKazSP29InLoveInQueens
  • I'm with @Ironring.  Evites are tacky and impersonal, but not the end of the world.  As long as the guests get necessary information about the event, the invitation has done its job whether it was delivered by post or email or carrier pigeon.
    Jen4948 said:
    Ironring said:
    @Jen4948, I disagree with your assessment of #1 but wont argue with you there because we can agree that not everyone would view it the same way as me. 

    However, for #2, are you honestly trying to tell me that a couple should change the date of their wedding just because they can't get some paper invites printed and mailed in time? I'm not referring to people who procrastinated, but people who actually have very short engagements. Invitations are meant to provide the guests with information for the wedding....which evites do perfectly well, even if you think it's tacky or doesn't fit the formality of the event. If a couple wants to get married in two weeks, it's ridiculous so say to them "oh sorry, but you have to push that back because otherwise you are short cutting things and need to have print invitations and wait for the mail to send them and then give people enough time to RSVP." I guess if it's really short notice, a phone call to each guest works too, but it still doesn't mean the a paper invitations is "required" provided the guests are given the appropriate information. 
    No, I am not. You are getting worked up and defensive simply because I don't agree with you. But no, I don't think a short period of time between engagement and wedding is a reason not to send paper invitations rather than using Evites. 

    Part of the job of wedding invitations is to convey the actual formality of the wedding along with the logistical information, and I don't think Evites "perfectly well" convey that at all. 

    Not to mention, many guests do not have Internet service or even look at Evites, let alone take them seriously or properly RSVP to them even for informal events.

    I am honestly trying to tell that just because a couple is in a hurry to get married and invite people to a wedding within a short period of time, they should still figure out how to send out written invitations within that short period of time.  It is not necessary to have them printed. If they need to cut down their guest list, figure out how to work preparing the invitations into their pre-wedding daily schedule, or otherwise change their wedding plans in order to do that, then that's what they need to do. 
    "Many" guests don't have the Internet?  Really?  In 2016?  Who are these people?  My grandparents are long gone, but my partner's are in their late 80s and they have email addresses and an internet connection.  The Internet has been a huge part of life for at least the past 15 years.  And if the recipient of an invitation is rude enough to refuse to take it seriously because it wasn't presented on the proper stationery, that says more about the recipient than the sender. 
  • I'm with @Ironring.  Evites are tacky and impersonal, but not the end of the world.  As long as the guests get necessary information about the event, the invitation has done its job whether it was delivered by post or email or carrier pigeon.
    Jen4948 said:
    Ironring said:
    @Jen4948, I disagree with your assessment of #1 but wont argue with you there because we can agree that not everyone would view it the same way as me. 

    However, for #2, are you honestly trying to tell me that a couple should change the date of their wedding just because they can't get some paper invites printed and mailed in time? I'm not referring to people who procrastinated, but people who actually have very short engagements. Invitations are meant to provide the guests with information for the wedding....which evites do perfectly well, even if you think it's tacky or doesn't fit the formality of the event. If a couple wants to get married in two weeks, it's ridiculous so say to them "oh sorry, but you have to push that back because otherwise you are short cutting things and need to have print invitations and wait for the mail to send them and then give people enough time to RSVP." I guess if it's really short notice, a phone call to each guest works too, but it still doesn't mean the a paper invitations is "required" provided the guests are given the appropriate information. 
    No, I am not. You are getting worked up and defensive simply because I don't agree with you. But no, I don't think a short period of time between engagement and wedding is a reason not to send paper invitations rather than using Evites. 

    Part of the job of wedding invitations is to convey the actual formality of the wedding along with the logistical information, and I don't think Evites "perfectly well" convey that at all. 

    Not to mention, many guests do not have Internet service or even look at Evites, let alone take them seriously or properly RSVP to them even for informal events.

    I am honestly trying to tell that just because a couple is in a hurry to get married and invite people to a wedding within a short period of time, they should still figure out how to send out written invitations within that short period of time.  It is not necessary to have them printed. If they need to cut down their guest list, figure out how to work preparing the invitations into their pre-wedding daily schedule, or otherwise change their wedding plans in order to do that, then that's what they need to do. 
    "Many" guests don't have the Internet?  Really?  In 2016?  Who are these people?  My grandparents are long gone, but my partner's are in their late 80s and they have email addresses and an internet connection.  The Internet has been a huge part of life for at least the past 15 years.  And if the recipient of an invitation is rude enough to refuse to take it seriously because it wasn't presented on the proper stationery, that says more about the recipient than the sender. 
    I know many seniors who do not use the internet.  Your assumptions are wrong.
    httpiimgurcomTCCjW0wjpg
  • ViczaesarViczaesar Central Coast, CA
    Eighth Anniversary 5000 Comments 500 Love Its First Answer
    member
    CMGragain said:
    I'm with @Ironring.  Evites are tacky and impersonal, but not the end of the world.  As long as the guests get necessary information about the event, the invitation has done its job whether it was delivered by post or email or carrier pigeon.
    Jen4948 said:
    Ironring said:
    @Jen4948, I disagree with your assessment of #1 but wont argue with you there because we can agree that not everyone would view it the same way as me. 

    However, for #2, are you honestly trying to tell me that a couple should change the date of their wedding just because they can't get some paper invites printed and mailed in time? I'm not referring to people who procrastinated, but people who actually have very short engagements. Invitations are meant to provide the guests with information for the wedding....which evites do perfectly well, even if you think it's tacky or doesn't fit the formality of the event. If a couple wants to get married in two weeks, it's ridiculous so say to them "oh sorry, but you have to push that back because otherwise you are short cutting things and need to have print invitations and wait for the mail to send them and then give people enough time to RSVP." I guess if it's really short notice, a phone call to each guest works too, but it still doesn't mean the a paper invitations is "required" provided the guests are given the appropriate information. 
    No, I am not. You are getting worked up and defensive simply because I don't agree with you. But no, I don't think a short period of time between engagement and wedding is a reason not to send paper invitations rather than using Evites. 

    Part of the job of wedding invitations is to convey the actual formality of the wedding along with the logistical information, and I don't think Evites "perfectly well" convey that at all. 

    Not to mention, many guests do not have Internet service or even look at Evites, let alone take them seriously or properly RSVP to them even for informal events.

    I am honestly trying to tell that just because a couple is in a hurry to get married and invite people to a wedding within a short period of time, they should still figure out how to send out written invitations within that short period of time.  It is not necessary to have them printed. If they need to cut down their guest list, figure out how to work preparing the invitations into their pre-wedding daily schedule, or otherwise change their wedding plans in order to do that, then that's what they need to do. 
    "Many" guests don't have the Internet?  Really?  In 2016?  Who are these people?  My grandparents are long gone, but my partner's are in their late 80s and they have email addresses and an internet connection.  The Internet has been a huge part of life for at least the past 15 years.  And if the recipient of an invitation is rude enough to refuse to take it seriously because it wasn't presented on the proper stationery, that says more about the recipient than the sender. 
    I know many seniors who do not use the internet.  Your assumptions are wrong.
    What assumptions?  She's anecdataing, and so are you.  To throw some more anecdata on the fire, almost every senior I know uses the internet.  All of our anecdata is equally relevant, or irrelevant.



    charlotte989875DrillSergeantCatmissJeanLouise
  • kimmiinthemittenkimmiinthemitten Detroit, MI
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Second Anniversary 5 Answers
    member
    edited August 2016
    CMGragain said:
    I'm with @Ironring.  Evites are tacky and impersonal, but not the end of the world.  As long as the guests get necessary information about the event, the invitation has done its job whether it was delivered by post or email or carrier pigeon.
    Jen4948 said:
    Ironring said:
    @Jen4948, I disagree with your assessment of #1 but wont argue with you there because we can agree that not everyone would view it the same way as me. 

    However, for #2, are you honestly trying to tell me that a couple should change the date of their wedding just because they can't get some paper invites printed and mailed in time? I'm not referring to people who procrastinated, but people who actually have very short engagements. Invitations are meant to provide the guests with information for the wedding....which evites do perfectly well, even if you think it's tacky or doesn't fit the formality of the event. If a couple wants to get married in two weeks, it's ridiculous so say to them "oh sorry, but you have to push that back because otherwise you are short cutting things and need to have print invitations and wait for the mail to send them and then give people enough time to RSVP." I guess if it's really short notice, a phone call to each guest works too, but it still doesn't mean the a paper invitations is "required" provided the guests are given the appropriate information. 
    No, I am not. You are getting worked up and defensive simply because I don't agree with you. But no, I don't think a short period of time between engagement and wedding is a reason not to send paper invitations rather than using Evites. 

    Part of the job of wedding invitations is to convey the actual formality of the wedding along with the logistical information, and I don't think Evites "perfectly well" convey that at all. 

    Not to mention, many guests do not have Internet service or even look at Evites, let alone take them seriously or properly RSVP to them even for informal events.

    I am honestly trying to tell that just because a couple is in a hurry to get married and invite people to a wedding within a short period of time, they should still figure out how to send out written invitations within that short period of time.  It is not necessary to have them printed. If they need to cut down their guest list, figure out how to work preparing the invitations into their pre-wedding daily schedule, or otherwise change their wedding plans in order to do that, then that's what they need to do. 
    "Many" guests don't have the Internet?  Really?  In 2016?  Who are these people?  My grandparents are long gone, but my partner's are in their late 80s and they have email addresses and an internet connection.  The Internet has been a huge part of life for at least the past 15 years.  And if the recipient of an invitation is rude enough to refuse to take it seriously because it wasn't presented on the proper stationery, that says more about the recipient than the sender. 
    I know many seniors who do not use the internet.  Your assumptions are wrong.
    I don't know any seniors. I sever that relationship on their 64th year and 364th day of living so I don't have to take their "one size fits all" special requirements into consideration ever. ETA </sarcasm> 
    image
    charlotte989875DrillSergeantCatkylexoSwissMs
  • SaintPaulGalSaintPaulGal
    500 Love Its 500 Comments First Anniversary First Answer
    member
    edited August 2016
    I didn't say every elderly person uses the internet.  But in my experience of life in the modern age, encountering someone who doesn't is more of a fluke than a mainstream experience.  Sort of like how blind people certainly exist, but that doesn't mean we are all required to have our invitations printed in braille.  Presumably if your guests have unusual limitations like this you would invite them in a way that they could make use of and understand. 
  • photokittyphotokitty where I want to be
    Moderator Tenth Anniversary 5000 Comments 500 Love Its
    mod
    edited August 2016

    While there's no one size fits all, but I can tell you I've gotten 4 calls today and 8 yesterday from people in their early 60's that said they don't have access to a computer. Access to the internet can be a larger barrier than knowledge/ability for many, not just seniors. It's not a fluke.

    Technology is a privilege and not everyone can afford it. Especially in rural areas and those with low incomes. When you can't afford your meds, food and rent, internet is not a priority. My work has opened my eyes to this fact. It's more common than we realize, people are typically too proud to tell you they don't have home internet.

    On a side note, I hate Evites - as in the online company. I don't mind an emailed invitation, but I HATE giving a website my info so I can see an invite and RSVP. Hopefully if someone sends evites/email they would follow up verbally if they don't receive a response. Also Evites end up in my junk mail bc those sites are spam in my mind, so I may or may not notice it.

    :kiss: ~xoxo~ :kiss:

    ILoveBeachMusicCMGragain
  • photokittyphotokitty where I want to be
    Moderator Tenth Anniversary 5000 Comments 500 Love Its
    mod
    edited August 2016
    I didn't say every elderly person uses the internet.  But in my experience of life in the modern age, encountering someone who doesn't is more of a fluke than a mainstream experience.  Sort of like how blind people certainly exist, but that doesn't mean we are all required to have our invitations printed in braille.  Presumably if your guests have unusual limitations like this you would invite them in a way that they could make use of and understand. 

    Less than 3% of Americans are blind and less than 1% of the USA population is profoundly deaf. Hard of hearing rises the number to 15% - coincidentally the same percentage of Americans estimated to not have home access to/ use the internet. I don't think 15% of all Americans is a fluke. Internet is still a luxury item that many Americans cannot afford. Or they choose not to use it.

    An estimated 5% of Americans use public transportation to get to work, far less than the number of those not using the internet, but you wouldn't call riding the bus or train to work a fluke would you? I'd call it mainstream even if it's only 5% of people.

    Life in the "modern age" is not the same for everyone. It was a huge issue for a lot of people when TVs went form analog to digital, or when phone landline service is discounted. Just bc it is a luxury you have and can afford does not mean it is true for others.

    OK, I'll stop now, but lack of these modern conveniences are obstacles the population I serve have to overcome on a daily basis.

    :kiss: ~xoxo~ :kiss:

  • photokitty said:
    I didn't say every elderly person uses the internet.  But in my experience of life in the modern age, encountering someone who doesn't is more of a fluke than a mainstream experience.  Sort of like how blind people certainly exist, but that doesn't mean we are all required to have our invitations printed in braille.  Presumably if your guests have unusual limitations like this you would invite them in a way that they could make use of and understand. 

    Less than 3% of Americans are blind and less than 1% of the USA population is profoundly deaf. Hard of hearing rises the number to 15% - coincidentally the same percentage of Americans estimated to not have home access to/ use the internet. I don't think 15% of all Americans is a fluke. Internet is still a luxury item that many Americans cannot afford. Or they choose not to use it.

    An estimated 5% of Americans use public transportation to get to work, far less than the number of those not using the internet, but you wouldn't call riding the bus or train to work a fluke would you? I'd call it mainstream even if it's only 5% of people.

    Life in the "modern age" is not the same for everyone. It was a huge issue for a lot of people when TVs went form analog to digital, or when phone landline service is discounted. Just bc it is a luxury you have and can afford does not mean it is true for others.

    OK, I'll stop now, but lack of these modern conveniences are obstacles the population I serve have to overcome on a daily basis.

    I don't want to get into a fight about how shitty it is to live in a situation of crushing poverty.  I am not disputing that at all.  But the obstacles faced by those living in the most dire forms of poverty aren't going to be solved by not using evites.  The same people who may not be able to afford internet in the home (which doesn't mean they can't/don't use email.  Public libraries and workforce centers typically have public computers for just this reason.) are also the people most likely to lack a stable home address at which to receive mail and/or lack a phone on which they can be reached.  Heck, they may lack access to extremely basic things like clean drinking water and restroom facilities.  But none of that makes evites a better or worse choice overall.
    OurWildKingdomJen4948
  • photokittyphotokitty where I want to be
    Moderator Tenth Anniversary 5000 Comments 500 Love Its
    mod
    photokitty said:
    I didn't say every elderly person uses the internet.  But in my experience of life in the modern age, encountering someone who doesn't is more of a fluke than a mainstream experience.  Sort of like how blind people certainly exist, but that doesn't mean we are all required to have our invitations printed in braille.  Presumably if your guests have unusual limitations like this you would invite them in a way that they could make use of and understand. 

    Less than 3% of Americans are blind and less than 1% of the USA population is profoundly deaf. Hard of hearing rises the number to 15% - coincidentally the same percentage of Americans estimated to not have home access to/ use the internet. I don't think 15% of all Americans is a fluke. Internet is still a luxury item that many Americans cannot afford. Or they choose not to use it.

    An estimated 5% of Americans use public transportation to get to work, far less than the number of those not using the internet, but you wouldn't call riding the bus or train to work a fluke would you? I'd call it mainstream even if it's only 5% of people.

    Life in the "modern age" is not the same for everyone. It was a huge issue for a lot of people when TVs went form analog to digital, or when phone landline service is discounted. Just bc it is a luxury you have and can afford does not mean it is true for others.

    OK, I'll stop now, but lack of these modern conveniences are obstacles the population I serve have to overcome on a daily basis.

    I don't want to get into a fight about how shitty it is to live in a situation of crushing poverty.  I am not disputing that at all.  But the obstacles faced by those living in the most dire forms of poverty aren't going to be solved by not using evites.  The same people who may not be able to afford internet in the home (which doesn't mean they can't/don't use email.  Public libraries and workforce centers typically have public computers for just this reason.) are also the people most likely to lack a stable home address at which to receive mail and/or lack a phone on which they can be reached.  Heck, they may lack access to extremely basic things like clean drinking water and restroom facilities.  But none of that makes evites a better or worse choice overall.
    Those are a lot of assumptions. Ones that tend to be true of younger people without internet, but not necessarily seniors.

    Heading to the library is not an easy task for many seniors or people in rural areas. Not everyone who can't afford internet is living in crushing poverty. Seniors living on a fixed income may not be able to add a monthly internet bill and buy a computer. Most seniors have regular mail delivery. They are more likely to live in paid off homes

    Internet is a modern convince that some people opt not to have for a variety of reasons. And it's 15% who can't access or choose not to use it. Like I said, not a fluke.

    There are also starving children in Africa while we're weighing all the problems facing the world.

    Evites could result in a burden for some guests, like it or not.
    :kiss: ~xoxo~ :kiss:

  • I prefer good old-fashioned invitations. But this is a funny thread. And here is some real data on Internet usage.

    http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/06/26/americans-internet-access-2000-2015/

    • Age differences: Older adults have lagged behind younger adults in their adoption, but now a clear majority (58%) of senior citizens uses the internet.
    charlotte989875CMGragainLadyCatherineDBSP29
2»
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards