Wedding Etiquette Forum

How to Avoid Added Guests to RSVP

2

Re: How to Avoid Added Guests to RSVP

  • I have to admit that I did a lot of research on +1's before sending out invites. Every thing I read said something along the line of it being okay to limit +1's to those in relationships. Some even went as far as saying only those who are married/engaged or only the SO's you've met. 

    I just assumed that those who were dating someone would bring them. Although I did have instances where someone I thought was single RSVPed for two. They totally ignored the wording on the invitation, but I'm happy they did. I didn't intend to leave out anyone's date. 


    You're a much nicer person than me! Of all the etiquette fails I read about, to me the most awful is RSVPing for uninvited guests. It is vile and indefensible, even if the guest should have been included. Approach the couple if someone is missed off. I am inviting all SOs, if I accidentally miss one off I don't mind a call to tell me they're in a relationship and ask if they can come. But approach me. Do not take it upon yourself to invite someone to my wedding with no input from me. Yuk.

    OP - I completely agree all people in a relationship should be invited together - even if it weren't etiquette why would you want to offend your friends by telling them that their relationship isn't valid enough for a plus one and that you don't care about their enjoyment of the day? For a lot of people it is no fun attending a wedding without their SO
  • There are two knottie#s in this thread: 884 and 220. #220 derailed things. 

    OP, knottie#884, recommend changing your name so you can be identified easier. And I'd go with any one of the examples given initially. Many people write in the X in " ___ of X number" for the guests so it's obvious how many people the invitation is meant for (I think that was your follow up question). But you don't have to.  Ultimately, not everyone will understand regardless and you may need to follow up with some phone calls once the rsvps are in. 
  • MeetTheLarasMeetTheLaras member
    100 Love Its 10 Comments Name Dropper First Answer
    edited September 2016
    I have to admit that I did a lot of research on +1's before sending out invites. Every thing I read said something along the line of it being okay to limit +1's to those in relationships. Some even went as far as saying only those who are married/engaged or only the SO's you've met. 

    I just assumed that those who were dating someone would bring them. Although I did have instances where someone I thought was single RSVPed for two. They totally ignored the wording on the invitation, but I'm happy they did. I didn't intend to leave out anyone's date. 


    There is a difference between a plus 1 and a SO. A SO is a specific person in a relationship with another person - BF, GF, fiancee, wife, husband etc. A plus one is any person the guest wants to bring. So you are correct that  a plus one isn't required for every guest, but all SOs of guest are to be included. 
    Yeah, I 100% agree and recognize that's the actual difference.

    This could be one of those SAT questions. All SO's are +1's but not all +1's are SOs. 

    Edit: I vaguely remembering reading once that a SO should be considered an invited actual guest and not a +1. Whereas a +1 is an open invitation to bring anyone the invited guest wants to bring. With that being said, everyone I talk to in person about this calls the SO's +1's as well. Maybe regional? Maybe laziness? I don't know.. Just something I've noticed. 
  • Where do you draw the line at a couple in a committed relationship but not committed enough to be invited to your wedding??    Is there a timing?   Age?   Job?   I don't get it.

    DH and I dated for 2.5 years before we were engaged and I didn't live with him until that time.   We were friends for years before we started dating.   I didn't take that lightly.   So once we started a relationship, it WAS a committed relationship.   And I will say that during that time, we were invited as a couple to every wedding that took place.   There wasn't one person we knew who tried to pull a line about whether or not we made 'the cut'.   Thank GOD we didn't have to have a talk with our friends or family members about how rude that would have been.

    IMO, the bottom line is that if you're trying to figure out ways to reduce your guest list, you're planning all wrong if you're trying to split up couples on a day that you're celebrating love.   


    I have a good friend getting married.   My DH is invited but family members of mine are not.   That IMO is the correct way to limit the guest list.   She's not splitting up people in relationships.   She's inviting by social unit. 
    ei34OurWildKingdomcowgirl8238lc07
  • I have to admit that I did a lot of research on +1's before sending out invites. Every thing I read said something along the line of it being okay to limit +1's to those in relationships. Some even went as far as saying only those who are married/engaged or only the SO's you've met. 

    I just assumed that those who were dating someone would bring them. Although I did have instances where someone I thought was single RSVPed for two. They totally ignored the wording on the invitation, but I'm happy they did. I didn't intend to leave out anyone's date. 


    There is a difference between a plus 1 and a SO. A SO is a specific person in a relationship with another person - BF, GF, fiancee, wife, husband etc. A plus one is any person the guest wants to bring. So you are correct that  a plus one isn't required for every guest, but all SOs of guest are to be included. 
    Yeah, I 100% agree and recognize that's the actual difference.

    This could be one of those SAT questions. All SO's are +1's but not all +1's are SOs. 

    Edit: I vaguely remembering reading once that a SO should be considered an invited actual guest and not a +1. Whereas a +1 is an open invitation to bring anyone the invited guest wants to bring. With that being said, everyone I talk to in person about this calls the SO's +1's as well. Maybe regional? Maybe laziness? I don't know.. Just something I've noticed. 
    This is the difference. SOs are invited on the invitation by name the same as their partner and are an invited guest of the hosts. A +1 is a guest of the invited guest and may be anyone of their choosing. A good host would try, if they can, to accommodate any SOs they find out about after the invites go out.
    DrillSergeantCatSP29OurWildKingdom
  • I found out by chance that one of FI's supposedly single friends had a boyfriend after she had RSVP'd. I was mortified. You'd better believe we called her up, apologised and told her that of course he was invited. I might have been less annoyed if I hadn't asked FI to check before the invites went out, ugh!

    Bottom line, of course we want all the people we love to have a great time and feel comfortable at our wedding - why would we ever expect someone to come without their boyfriend or girlfriend? It's really easy to just....not be a dick.
                 
    ei34OurWildKingdombluebell42
  • We had a number of invites go out with just the guy's name on them, because H is etiquette challenged and didn't know we needed to invite SOs (or, I don't know, their WIVES). We didn't have enough space to do plus ones for single people, and I was going off the list he gave me and I didn't really know the guys he was inviting so I assumed they were single since he gave no mention of SOs.  So, once I found out that some of these guys were in committed relationships I made him call each one up and apologize for the confusion, and that of course their GFs/wives were invited.

    Also, for the record, nobody tried to add a plus one or anything to their RSVPs.  We had a couple single friends ask later if they could bring a date, which was fine since we had enough declines.  
    Married 9.12.15
    image
  • I have to admit that I did a lot of research on +1's before sending out invites. Every thing I read said something along the line of it being okay to limit +1's to those in relationships. Some even went as far as saying only those who are married/engaged or only the SO's you've met. 

    I just assumed that those who were dating someone would bring them. Although I did have instances where someone I thought was single RSVPed for two. They totally ignored the wording on the invitation, but I'm happy they did. I didn't intend to leave out anyone's date. 


    There is a difference between a plus 1 and a SO. A SO is a specific person in a relationship with another person - BF, GF, fiancee, wife, husband etc. A plus one is any person the guest wants to bring. So you are correct that  a plus one isn't required for every guest, but all SOs of guest are to be included. 
    Yeah, I 100% agree and recognize that's the actual difference.

    This could be one of those SAT questions. All SO's are +1's but not all +1's are SOs. 

    Edit: I vaguely remembering reading once that a SO should be considered an invited actual guest and not a +1. Whereas a +1 is an open invitation to bring anyone the invited guest wants to bring. With that being said, everyone I talk to in person about this calls the SO's +1's as well. Maybe regional? Maybe laziness? I don't know.. Just something I've noticed. 
    Exactly right. That is why SOs are invited by name and not "and guest". 
    SP29InLoveInQueenscowgirl8238
  • I have to admit that I did a lot of research on +1's before sending out invites. Every thing I read said something along the line of it being okay to limit +1's to those in relationships. Some even went as far as saying only those who are married/engaged or only the SO's you've met. 

    I just assumed that those who were dating someone would bring them. Although I did have instances where someone I thought was single RSVPed for two. They totally ignored the wording on the invitation, but I'm happy they did. I didn't intend to leave out anyone's date. 


    There is a difference between a plus 1 and a SO. A SO is a specific person in a relationship with another person - BF, GF, fiancee, wife, husband etc. A plus one is any person the guest wants to bring. So you are correct that  a plus one isn't required for every guest, but all SOs of guest are to be included. 
    Yeah, I 100% agree and recognize that's the actual difference.

    This could be one of those SAT questions. All SO's are +1's but not all +1's are SOs. 

    Edit: I vaguely remembering reading once that a SO should be considered an invited actual guest and not a +1. Whereas a +1 is an open invitation to bring anyone the invited guest wants to bring. With that being said, everyone I talk to in person about this calls the SO's +1's as well. Maybe regional? Maybe laziness? I don't know.. Just something I've noticed. 
    Exactly right. That is why SOs are invited by name and not "and guest".




    SITB stupid mobile site



    I have a theory that people call inviting SOs of friends and family plus ones makes it easier for them to justify arbitrary cut offs for inviting them, no ring no bring and all that bullshit. If you say you're only offering plus ones to engaged or married couples it sounds like you're doing them the favor, when people's SOs get invited by name and not "and guest" which = "plus one". It makes it easier in their mind to say "it's ok, plus ones aren't required". They pretend it's the same thing rather than accept that relationship = social unit. 
    geebee908DrillSergeantCat
  • We had some guests tag uninvited extras on their RSVP. The invitation was addressed "Mr. & Mrs. John and Jane Doe", and we left the "___ number of guests" space blank. We got their RSVP back with "4" in the "number of guests" space. They had scribbled in their adult son and, get this, Jane Doe's elderly mother.

    DH and I have since warned his siblings (the guests were on his mother's side) that when they get married, fill out John and Jane's RSVP for them, and word it carefully and firmly.
  • OurWildKingdomOurWildKingdom in the 216 member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Third Anniversary 5 Answers
    We left a space on our RSVP for "number of people attending" and got a surprise plus-one from one of my friends from my old church. We're prepared for an extra person, fortunately. She's 87, so I'm curious who her plus-one will be.  :)
    MeetTheLaras
  • MobKazMobKaz Chicago suburbs member
    Tenth Anniversary 5000 Comments 500 Love Its 5 Answers
    Jen4948 said:
    Is there a way to word the RSVP card that people cannot or will not add in guests who are not invited.

    I am still a few months away from sending out invites and this part is giving me the most anxiety.  I really don't want to have to call anyone to inform them that the guest they wrote in is not invited to the wedding.

    What has worked for you?
    Unfortunately, there's no way to prevent anyone from writing in extra guests in advance and calling them to tell them that the invitation includes only those persons listed on the envelope is the only etiquette-approved way of letting them know that. And unless you are planning to turn away uninvited guests at the door, it is also the only effective way to deal with it (although you run the risk that people will throw temper tantrums and/or show up with uninvited guests anyway).
    A relative had this happen even after the guest was told children were not invited.  It was an OOT wedding.  My husband's sister brought her two children knowing full well that children were not invited.  I was pretty po"d myself as Iwent to great lengths
    Good etiquette calls for inviting SOs that are married, engaged, living together, in a serious relationship, or have a close relationship to the couple.  Any guests in a less committed relationship do not require a +1, but it is up to the couple.  Nonetheless, the couple should be fair and even with all the couples that fall into the "less committed" category.  Etiquette is- to some degree- a matter of opinion, but I personally have not read anything that says otherwise.

  • MobKazMobKaz Chicago suburbs member
    Tenth Anniversary 5000 Comments 500 Love Its 5 Answers
    Ironring said:
    There are two knottie#s in this thread: 884 and 220. #220 derailed things. 

    OP, knottie#884, recommend changing your name so you can be identified easier. And I'd go with any one of the examples given initially. Many people write in the X in " ___ of X number" for the guests so it's obvious how many people the invitation is meant for (I think that was your follow up question). But you don't have to.  Ultimately, not everyone will understand regardless and you may need to follow up with some phone calls once the rsvps are in. 
    #220 has some deleted posts.  Apparently she enjoys dishing out bad advice based on personal experience.  She was proud to have a B list as well.  I didn't have the stamina to explore any posts beyond that one. 
    DrillSergeantCat
  • ViczaesarViczaesar Central Coast, CA member
    Ninth Anniversary 5000 Comments 500 Love Its First Answer
    I have to admit that I did a lot of research on +1's before sending out invites. Every thing I read said something along the line of it being okay to limit +1's to those in relationships. Some even went as far as saying only those who are married/engaged or only the SO's you've met. 

    I just assumed that those who were dating someone would bring them. Although I did have instances where someone I thought was single RSVPed for two. They totally ignored the wording on the invitation, but I'm happy they did. I didn't intend to leave out anyone's date. 


    You're a much nicer person than me! Of all the etiquette fails I read about, to me the most awful is RSVPing for uninvited guests. It is vile and indefensible, even if the guest should have been included. Approach the couple if someone is missed off. I am inviting all SOs, if I accidentally miss one off I don't mind a call to tell me they're in a relationship and ask if they can come. But approach me. Do not take it upon yourself to invite someone to my wedding with no input from me. Yuk.

    OP - I completely agree all people in a relationship should be invited together - even if it weren't etiquette why would you want to offend your friends by telling them that their relationship isn't valid enough for a plus one and that you don't care about their enjoyment of the day? For a lot of people it is no fun attending a wedding without their SO
    Really?  Of all the truly shitty things people can (and do) do to their friends and loved ones, you seriously think RSVPing for uninvited guests - including when the host is in the wrong and left off someone's SO - is the most awful thing?  Not having a standing ceremony, not a 5-hour gap, not a cash bar or switching halfway through the reception, not including a cutesy poem in the invitation asking for money, not serving better food to the head table?



    OurWildKingdomSP29
  • OurWildKingdomOurWildKingdom in the 216 member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Third Anniversary 5 Answers
    edited September 2016
    Viczaesar said:
    I have to admit that I did a lot of research on +1's before sending out invites. Every thing I read said something along the line of it being okay to limit +1's to those in relationships. Some even went as far as saying only those who are married/engaged or only the SO's you've met. 

    I just assumed that those who were dating someone would bring them. Although I did have instances where someone I thought was single RSVPed for two. They totally ignored the wording on the invitation, but I'm happy they did. I didn't intend to leave out anyone's date. 


    You're a much nicer person than me! Of all the etiquette fails I read about, to me the most awful is RSVPing for uninvited guests. It is vile and indefensible, even if the guest should have been included. Approach the couple if someone is missed off. I am inviting all SOs, if I accidentally miss one off I don't mind a call to tell me they're in a relationship and ask if they can come. But approach me. Do not take it upon yourself to invite someone to my wedding with no input from me. Yuk.

    OP - I completely agree all people in a relationship should be invited together - even if it weren't etiquette why would you want to offend your friends by telling them that their relationship isn't valid enough for a plus one and that you don't care about their enjoyment of the day? For a lot of people it is no fun attending a wedding without their SO
    Really?  Of all the truly shitty things people can (and do) do to their friends and loved ones, you seriously think RSVPing for uninvited guests - including when the host is in the wrong and left off someone's SO - is the most awful thing?  Not having a standing ceremony, not a 5-hour gap, not a cash bar or switching halfway through the reception, not including a cutesy poem in the invitation asking for money, not serving better food to the head table?
    Don't forget turning your bridal party into slave labor! 

    Get some perspective, @Englishrose!
  • Chill. It's just my opinion. Maybe it's the Brit in me. Yes, I think inviting someone to a wedding without asking is just beyond awful and I'm surprised people seem to get a free pass on here for doing it. Feel free to disagree.
  • Chill. It's just my opinion. Maybe it's the Brit in me. Yes, I think inviting someone to a wedding without asking is just beyond awful and I'm surprised people seem to get a free pass on here for doing it. Feel free to disagree.
    Nobody gives anyone a free pass for inviting someone to a wedding without asking. People were just responding to the "it's the most awful etiquette fail". It is awful but not necessarily "the"most awful. It may be the most awful thing a guest could do since most of the etiquette issues we talk about on here are issues that deal with what the bride and groom do.
  • Chill. It's just my opinion. Maybe it's the Brit in me. Yes, I think inviting someone to a wedding without asking is just beyond awful and I'm surprised people seem to get a free pass on here for doing it. Feel free to disagree.
    Nobody gives anyone a free pass for inviting someone to a wedding without asking. People were just responding to the "it's the most awful etiquette fail". It is awful but not necessarily "the"most awful. It may be the most awful thing a guest could do since most of the etiquette issues we talk about on here are issues that deal with what the bride and groom do.
    Ok fair enough. In my opinion it is worse than most of the examples given by Viczaeser (except maybe the standing ceremony, never known of one of those but WTAF?) because all that is needed is a quick phone call to the bride or groom and it is so avoidable. I'm certainly not defending any of the other things mentioned, they are rude, but I don't think I lack "perspective" because this one in particular is a bugbear of mine!
  • OurWildKingdomOurWildKingdom in the 216 member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Third Anniversary 5 Answers
    Chill. It's just my opinion. Maybe it's the Brit in me. Yes, I think inviting someone to a wedding without asking is just beyond awful and I'm surprised people seem to get a free pass on here for doing it. Feel free to disagree.
    Nobody gives anyone a free pass for inviting someone to a wedding without asking. People were just responding to the "it's the most awful etiquette fail". It is awful but not necessarily "the"most awful. It may be the most awful thing a guest could do since most of the etiquette issues we talk about on here are issues that deal with what the bride and groom do.
    It's not even the most awful thing a guest could do. Tacky, yes, but not as heinous as getting insanely drunk, making a scene, hitting on the bride or groom, destroying property, etc.
    SP29
  • MobKaz said:
    #220 has some deleted posts.  Apparently she enjoys dishing out bad advice based on personal experience.  She was proud to have a B list as well.  I didn't have the stamina to explore any posts beyond that one. 
    you have way too much time on your hands
  • flantasticflantastic The Midwest member
    Seventh Anniversary 2500 Comments 500 Love Its 5 Answers
    MobKaz said:
    #220 has some deleted posts.  Apparently she enjoys dishing out bad advice based on personal experience.  She was proud to have a B list as well.  I didn't have the stamina to explore any posts beyond that one. 
    you have way too much time on your hands
    LOL
    DrillSergeantCatgeebee908InLoveInQueens
  • DrillSergeantCatDrillSergeantCat Oklahoma City, OK member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Fourth Anniversary First Answer
    MobKaz said:
    #220 has some deleted posts.  Apparently she enjoys dishing out bad advice based on personal experience.  She was proud to have a B list as well.  I didn't have the stamina to explore any posts beyond that one. 
    you have way too much time on your hands

  • NowIAmSypNowIAmSyp East Hanover, NJ member
    Sixth Anniversary 500 Love Its 500 Comments First Answer
    MobKaz said:
    #220 has some deleted posts.  Apparently she enjoys dishing out bad advice based on personal experience.  She was proud to have a B list as well.  I didn't have the stamina to explore any posts beyond that one. 
    you have way too much time on your hands
    Says the poster who took the time to research how many sites to prove her point- and then took the time to post them here....
    DrillSergeantCatgeebee908InLoveInQueensOurWildKingdom
  • NowIAmSyp said:
    Says the poster who took the time to research how many sites to prove her point- and then took the time to post them here....
    Which took about 30 seconds to copy and paste as they ALL say the same thing...
  • DrillSergeantCatDrillSergeantCat Oklahoma City, OK member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Fourth Anniversary First Answer
    NowIAmSyp said:
    Says the poster who took the time to research how many sites to prove her point- and then took the time to post them here....
    Which took about 30 seconds to copy and paste as they ALL say the same thing...
    And it takes about 30 seconds to look at someone's post history, too. So...
    ILoveBeachMusicgeebee908banana468OliveOilsMom
  • And it takes about 30 seconds to look at someone's post history, too. So...


This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards