4 ms·

> We’d just invite close family and friends. Then, we actually made a list of ‘close family and friends’… and realized why people have 100 or 200 people at a we

> We’d just invite close family and friends. Then, we actually made a list of ‘close family and friends’… and realized why people have 100 or 200 people at a wedding. Then you either have a VERY big family or a VERY broad definition of “close friends”.

Finnucane 9y ago
Yeah, my wife and I actually pulled off the small wedding in our living room with about 20 people there. The officiant was an old friend of the family. Still glad we did it that way.
CapitalistCartr 9y ago
Having had to make such plans, lists grow fast. Well, we have to invite all three of my sisters. So their husbands/boyfriends, kids, kids boy/girlfriends, grandkids. Then most of our friends have families. We have to invite Joe: he was there on our first date. Justin, for sure: he helped us move in together . . Crap, now there's ove a hundred people.
- josefresco 9y ago
  Just say "no kids" and "no dates" and watch 50% of your friends and family opt-out - problem solved. /s
- hvidgaard 9y ago
  Then split it. Family and close friends, i.e. people you see regularly for a traditional party in the evening. For everyone else there is an informal dessert reception after the ceremony. There is this idea that for it to be a "proper" wedding, you have to host a formal party and provide for each and everyone that has had an impact on your life. It doesn't have to be this way, but if one chose to do so, then the implications is the planning and cost skyrocket.
mrweasel 9y ago
Well, there's two of them, and each family member or friend may bring a partner, so I can see someone reaching 100 quickly. But I see your point. In terms of social media, I might be the one that a little outside the norm. I have at most 150 friends, family members and acquaintances on Facebook. Maybe 10 of them most the majority of content. If people but nothing but links, games or only share stuff, I just unfollow them. I only care about the stuff that's actually going on in people lives, that is an increasingly small subset of all the Facebook posts. My Facebook feed is curated, by me, so that I can browse everything that happened in the last week in 10 minutes at the most. So to me the articles claim that wanting chronological order is pointless doesn't make much sense to me. Facebook just doesn't seem to encourage this kind of usage, there simply isn't enough ad money in it.
RandallBrown 9y ago
Can you think of 25 people you would want to invite to your wedding? Add in significant others, then double again for bride and groom. That's 100 people. Sure there's lots of overlap, so it wouldn't actually be 100, but I know I personally have more than 25 people I want at my wedding that aren't friends/family of my fiancee.
fwip 9y ago
Our wedding had close friends and family. All total, we had 23 people, counting the caterer.

Finnucane 9y ago

Yeah, my wife and I actually pulled off the small wedding in our living room with about 20 people there. The officiant was an old friend of the family. Still glad we did it that way.

CapitalistCartr 9y ago

Having had to make such plans, lists grow fast. Well, we have to invite all three of my sisters. So their husbands/boyfriends, kids, kids boy/girlfriends, grandkids. Then most of our friends have families. We have to invite Joe: he was there on our first date. Justin, for sure: he helped us move in together . . Crap, now there's ove a hundred people.

josefresco 9y ago
Just say "no kids" and "no dates" and watch 50% of your friends and family opt-out - problem solved. /s
hvidgaard 9y ago
Then split it. Family and close friends, i.e. people you see regularly for a traditional party in the evening. For everyone else there is an informal dessert reception after the ceremony. There is this idea that for it to be a "proper" wedding, you have to host a formal party and provide for each and everyone that has had an impact on your life. It doesn't have to be this way, but if one chose to do so, then the implications is the planning and cost skyrocket.

mrweasel 9y ago

Well, there's two of them, and each family member or friend may bring a partner, so I can see someone reaching 100 quickly. But I see your point. In terms of social media, I might be the one that a little outside the norm. I have at most 150 friends, family members and acquaintances on Facebook. Maybe 10 of them most the majority of content. If people but nothing but links, games or only share stuff, I just unfollow them. I only care about the stuff that's actually going on in people lives, that is an increasingly small subset of all the Facebook posts. My Facebook feed is curated, by me, so that I can browse everything that happened in the last week in 10 minutes at the most. So to me the articles claim that wanting chronological order is pointless doesn't make much sense to me. Facebook just doesn't seem to encourage this kind of usage, there simply isn't enough ad money in it.

RandallBrown 9y ago

Can you think of 25 people you would want to invite to your wedding? Add in significant others, then double again for bride and groom. That's 100 people. Sure there's lots of overlap, so it wouldn't actually be 100, but I know I personally have more than 25 people I want at my wedding that aren't friends/family of my fiancee.

fwip 9y ago

Our wedding had close friends and family. All total, we had 23 people, counting the caterer.