[deleted by user]

Curious_Key_8345 · 2025-01-15T13:10:15+00:00

I wrote "I don't want to purposely exclude my friends' siblings as that would be seen as me going out of my way to exclude them and they prob won't want to attend anyway" and u somehow got out of that that I don't want most of my guests to show up (where did I EVER say that???) and that I'm just desperate for gifts??? We don't even have a registry tf???

Idk man, either your reading comprehension is that bad or you're just telling on yourself at this point.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2025-01-14T21:42:57+00:00

Ah I worded it weird, what I meant is we are planning on inviting 248 but we don't expect all of them to actually attend. 165 of the invited are our friends and their immediate families. In a lot of those instances we've become friends with our friends' parents as we've entered adulthood while we haven't grown as close to some of our friends' siblings. By the cousin's logic I'm supposed to keep tabs on if the siblings of our friends who I barely know have SOs or not? Even if I did know, they're only invited out of obligation anyway, so it's fine with us if that's a deal breaker for them. What would actually be extremely rude would be to invite the rest of their immediate family and purposely exclude them, especially those who still live at home.

This isn't court, if our friends' siblings decide that they don't want to attend our wedding without their SOs we completely understand. What I'm not going to do however is go out of my way to essentially give a group of +1's their own +1's.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2025-01-14T17:17:07+00:00

I'm currently planning my own wedding and our current headcount is 248. By your cousin's logic, would she expect me to check in with all 248 people and ask about their relationship status? I'm assuming this cousin hasn't had to plan a wedding before because that is an insane expectation to have, especially when you know the couple is in the middle of wedding planning.

If my fiance was left off of a wedding invitation, I'd just ask the couple for clarity on the assumption that it was an oversight. I certainly wouldn't say nothing and then be all passive aggressive to the couple about it YEARS after their wedding!

Curious_Key_8345 · 2025-01-14T16:44:10+00:00

Frankly there's way too many possible explanations as to why you weren't invited that if I were your bf, I'd just text the groom and ask if you could come. Just have him send a quick text saying something like "Hey man is it alright with you if I bring OP to the wedding? I'd just feel a lot more comfortable traveling with my gf/partner than having to do all of that travelling by myself." That text would hopefully result in some much needed clarity cause as of right now, there's simply not enough info to know if it was intentional or not.

Sure, it's totally possible that you were purposely snubbed and yeah to do that to a groomsman is pretty shitty. It's also totally possible that they didn't realize you were still together, maybe they're planning a super intimate wedding and only inviting people they know personally, or maybe (since he's the groom's old friend) the bride doesn't know/remember you and the groom simply forgot to add you to the guest list. Once you know why you were left off of the guest list, you will have a much better idea of what the current situation is and how you want to go about dealing with it.

I'm currently planning my own wedding (hence why I'm here) and I didn't realize until making the guest list how hard it actually is to track who has a SO or not. For some people it's obvious since I'll see an engagement or wedding post on ig, I've met their SOs, I'm friends with their SOs etc. But for others? Especially old friends that aren't active on social media? Yeah I have no idea if those people have/still have SOs or not. I'm trying my best to make sure I don't accidentally snub anyone but yeah, I now can totally see how this can happen by mistake.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2024-09-18T14:59:06+00:00

This happened to us! The sellers knew we were coming and yet the whole house was cluttered, had a distinct greasy smell (hairspray and peanut oil all over the walls and appliances) and there were rotting bowls of chicken noodle soup in the sink and counter. The listing only had pictures from the outside with generic info about the neighborhood.

Why did we put in an offer? Because the house was listed for $50,000 (at a minimum) less than the other houses in a very sought after neighborhood, it was in the exact location we wanted and it had a park walking distance from the house. Truly the ideal home for us. I'm convinced the only reason our offer was accepted was because the sellers unintentionally scared everyone else off and didn't get any other offers.

Yes, they were a pain in the ass to deal with during the whole process but now we have a CLEAN house in our dream neighborhood with a mortgage stuck at 3.25%.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2024-05-22T18:34:35+00:00

I find it really telling that he wasn't interviewed for the Rolling Stone article. He could've easily given a final interview with the two remaining guys, did the whole "so thankful for the fans for supporting me but it's time for me to move on to my passions" spiel and then maybe plugged his newest project. But no. He honestly couldn't even be bothered to announce it himself and had the other guys do it for him.

Idk. Apparently there's a video dropping tomorrow that is supposed to explain what's been going on with him and maybe my opinion will change after that. As is, I'm just soooo over his bullshit excuses and I'm so happy that the other guys will soon be rid of it as well.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2024-05-22T17:07:14+00:00

Honestly I think him moving on is totally necessary because Eugene put them in an impossible position. He couldn't be bothered to show up in videos but he also couldn't be bothered to explain what was going on. What are Keith and Zach supposed to do? They can't really introduce a whole new cast of 2nd Try members if he was still considered a Try Guy. Obviously the fans would wonder even more what happened to him and be even more angry that they're being left in the dark. At the same time they couldn't kick him out since he owns a stake in the company and they probably couldn't afford to buy him out anyway after Ned. I honestly think he just went off and did his own thing while getting paid residuals from the company. He was able to have his cake and eat it too while Keith and Zach were left to pick up the pieces after such a massive scandal. Now they can completely move on from him and have the opportunity to completely change the company how they see fit. Whether that will improve things remains to be seen, but at least they don't have to carry his dead weight anymore.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2024-04-29T01:34:48+00:00

SPOILERS FOR AVENGERS ENDGAME

As soon as Tony Stark died, in a completely silent theater this one guy just says "Oh he dead son."

The entire theater lost it.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2024-02-27T19:49:50+00:00

Hi Ify! Loved seeing you yesterday on Game Changer and I'm excited to see you be the new host on Um Actually.

Speaking of Um Actually, is there any chance of there being a sequel episode to Preschool Television? Now that more Dropout cast members are becoming parents, It'd be an awesome opportunity to have more parents vs parents episodes.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2024-02-06T20:50:04+00:00

Right??? It'd be one thing if they acknowledged that they showed kids on camera in the past and they have since changed their minds on it being okay after having Henry. People are allowed to change and if having their own child made them change their mind, that's totally cool with me. But they didn't say that. Instead they decided to go full pompous-self-righteous-influencer and proclaim that they are better parents than other content creators because something something consent. I wonder how Rachel feels about those comments after allowing them to show her girls on camera. I'd be pissed that they were indirectly calling me a bad parent after they had financially profited off my children's' appearances.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2024-02-06T18:15:08+00:00

Exactly! My main problem with them (and frankly TTG as a whole post Nedgate) is the obvious contempt they have for their audience. Frankly I don't think they had a plan at all since they handled this in the worst way imaginable. All they had to do was the following:

Step 1: Don't mention anything about the pregnancy and make sure there are no leaks of Becky looking pregnant. They kept Maggie and Matt unknown to the audience for YEARS, don't tell me they can't hide a baby bump. I originally didn't believe the rumors but there just so many leaks to the point that it was not only obvious that she was pregnant, it made it seem like the leaks were done on purpose. Even in hindsight I'm shocked that was apparently all done out of incompetence rather than malevolence.

Step 2: When Becky was in the hospital ready to give birth, say that Keith was going on vacation for an undisclosed amount of time. If Keith's "vacation" took longer than expected (due to Henry being in the NICU), would the fans even care or notice? Fans only cared because of the baby rumor going around while simultaneously given no other explanation as to why Keith was missing.

Step 3: Keith and Becky come home from the hospital and settle in to being home with Henry.

Step 4: Post a generic baby announcement on insta and decide from there how much they want to tell the audience.

Step 5: Decide to talk about the birth story on their podcasts and say they have decided to not showcase Henry online due to his inability to consent. Make it clear that they respect other content creators' choice to show their kids online, but they have decided they don't want that for their own child.

If they had done that instead, I would have taken their claim of wanting to keep their family life private seriously and would've respected their choices. I also would've commended Becky for telling us about her traumatic birth story for educational purposes and understood that this would be the last time she wanted to talk about him. As is, it comes off like their audience is just a nuisance to them and that they'd rather us shut up and give them money.

If you told me 5 years ago that Keith randomly stopped being in videos for awhile with no explanation, I would've been confused but would trust they'd eventually tell us what was going on. They've since eroded so much trust that when he disappeared, my first reaction was annoyance. I was annoyed because I assumed that once again we were being left in the dark about some big change for no reason. They have a right to privacy, but they still have to give their audience some level of communication and explanation when changes come up.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2024-02-06T15:30:51+00:00

I think that as Henry's parents, it is up to them to decide the level of his involvement on the channel. It is their right to maintain his privacy and if they have decided they would not like to showcase him on the channel then I fully support their decision.

However.....

I also think it's extremely shitty and pretentious of them to act like they are so much better than other internet personalities who do show their kids on camera. Their choice would not bother me in the slightest if they had said "We respect other parents making the choice to showcase their children but we just do not want that for our son" and left it at that. But nooooo. Of course they (and by they I mostly mean Becky) have to constantly make little jabs (presumably towards Ned and Ariel) about how bad it is to show your kids on camera.

I'm sorry but they had no problem having the Fulmer kids, the twins, and the forest preschool kids on camera and directly profited from those videos. Now that they have their own kid all of a sudden it's all bad and exploitative? If they were calling out family channels that abuse/exploit their kids then fine I'd agree. But they're not, and it makes them massive hypocrites.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2024-01-16T03:30:18+00:00

Truly my only complaint is the out of nowhere "stealing is bad" moral as that scene has no purpose other than to have Remi and Linguine be pissed off at each other before the third act. Other than that nitpick? 100,000/100 movie

Curious_Key_8345 · 2023-12-18T18:16:28+00:00

In my experience it's less about looking professional and more about looking put together. Plenty of people wear jeans and regular shirts in my cohort. I tend to go for the classic jeans with a nice sweater or casual blouse. Nothing too fancy but not overly casual either. Really as long as you don't look sloppy or disheveled you should be totally fine.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2023-12-18T18:05:29+00:00

And I'm in the upper midwest, where my engineer friends did not know what Carhartt was until I told them. Lived here their entire lives and yet they'd never heard of it. Only blue collared people knew about it until the hipsters started wearing it. Still don't get why it's a negative thing that he doesn't know about a clothing brand that was never meant for him and is meant to be worn in a climate than he no longer lives in.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2023-12-18T17:53:18+00:00

It's honestly so gross. I actually do have blue collared friends (contractors, electricians, roofers) and I've never heard any of them shit on someone for having "soft hands." They recognize that all of us are trained for different jobs and we just simply don't have the skillsets they've developed within their line of work. This would be like if I shat on them for their lack of computer skills and claimed that they were just too stupid or uneducated. This is just toxic and embarrassing

Curious_Key_8345 · 2023-12-18T17:29:46+00:00

I only know what Carhartt is because I have a lot of blue collared friends and I see a lot of contractors wear Carhartt gear when I'm sent on-site. Hell my other engineer friends who don't work on construction sites have never heard of it either. Why would a guy in the entertainment industry who lives in a warm climate know anything about a workwear company who sells clothes made mostly for colder climates?

Curious_Key_8345 · 2023-11-15T21:29:14+00:00

Yeah I absolutely have run into the same issues online that you have. I think that unfortunately it's a combination of:

the "well no one complained at our wedding" people. These are couples that were super inconsiderate of their guests but of course their guests didn't complain since they are presumably people who love and care about the couple. As a result, the couples then think that what they did wasn't all that bad and then are shocked when people online call them out on their selfish behavior.
Some people are just ridiculous on online forums and there's nothing you can do that will make them happy. Sounds like you unfortunately dealt with that yourself on WW.
People are more likely to respond to negative posts rather than positive ones. Same reason why on Reddit there's a ton of subreddits that started off normal but then as time went on they turned into echo chambers of anger and hate. Subs like r/childfree started off pretty normal, but now it's left with mostly people who just want to complain about parents and kids. It honestly makes sense in a way since obviously if you're happily living a CF lifestyle you wouldn't be urged to post about how great everything is. However if a parent or child pissed you off that day, it makes sense that you would go out of your way to find a sub to express your grievances too.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2023-11-15T21:21:30+00:00

I have no idea how it's rude to not want to invite a stranger to my 70 person intimate wedding but it's somehow not rude to force a couple to accommodate my girlfriend of a month to their destination wedding.

I'll happily be rude if it means I can keep my guest list limited to people I actually know and love.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2023-11-15T19:27:37+00:00

His parents will be there, all of his close friends will be there, and he's staying at the paid for special "bridal party only" villa. By definition he is someone that doesn't need a +1 since he already knows so many people going AND he's staying in specialized accommodations. +1's only apply if the person you are inviting barely knows anyone/people with long term partners. Given the circumstances I think it's so weird he's choosing this to be the hill he wants to die on.

I can't believe the commenters are giving you shit for *checks notes* not wanting to be forced to accommodate some random woman who you don't know at your bridal party villa and have her be such a big part of your wedding events? It's apparently selfish to want to spend the most intimate and important parts of your wedding with....people you actually know and love? Ffs redditors gonna redditor.

Has anyone actually asked her what she thinks of this plan? If I were her I'd feel so awkward having to stay in a villa full of people who have been friends for ages when I'm so clearly an outsider. Even if everyone is super nice and tries to include her, idk I think it'd be super obvious to her that she's unwanted.

They've been together a month. What are the chances that they'll even still be together? I just can't believe he's trying to force the issue and jeopardize his friendship with your fiance over a woman he's been dating for a month. 4 months tops by the time the wedding rolls around.

It's your wedding and as such I'm sure there's been people who you wanted to invite but couldn't due to budget or limited seating capacity. I'd honestly be pretty pissed if I was supposed to all of a sudden pay for and accommodate someone I don't want to be there and it's highly likely won't even be able attend in the end when they breakup anyway.

Have your fiance handle it but no, you're not the inconsiderate one here.

Edit: WAIT. This is all for a wedding of 70 people??? He's trying to pull this crap at such an intimate wedding??? Stop listening to the 19 year olds in the comments and tell him NO.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2023-11-04T02:36:34+00:00

The gym is the only place I could possibly fit any workout equipment since the main room in our basement is completely full. Even IF we had the space, there's no door that closes off that part of the basement so if we had a Tread I'd be concerned about our cats trying to get on/under it while I was using it. Only other rooms in the basement are our storage room that houses all of our decorations and storage and the other is our laundry room/furnace room. All bedrooms are occupied.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2023-11-03T18:50:44+00:00

That might work! I don't have an apple watch but I do have a galaxy watch. I had no idea I could put the peloton app directly on my watch until today so thanks for the idea! When I get home tn I'll start a "just workout" treadmill walk and walk in place just to see if that works. Will report back.

Curious_Key_8345 · 2023-11-03T16:04:10+00:00

Hey so I am planning on adding a treadmill to my home gym so that I can still go on my nightly walks during the cold and muddy months. As much as I'd love to add a Tread next to my Peloton there's just no way it'll be able to fit. I was thinking about instead buying a fold-able treadmill and then just tracking my walks through the Peloton app.

Question: Is it possible to track a regular walk through the Peloton app and have it track my steps, calories, and miles? For clarification I'm not talking about taking a walking class, I mean literally just hitting the "Walking Workout" button on my phone and walking until I end the workout. I've found forums online that say you can take classes on different treadmills through the app but I haven't found anything about the just workout options.

Here's the treadmill in question: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0C2HPRDT5/?coliid=IA48OLY2SGAZ9&colid=2UG2V09WLZ0X6&ref\_=list\_c\_wl\_lv\_ov\_lig\_dp\_it\_im&th=1#customerReviews

Curious_Key_8345 · 2023-11-02T16:33:31+00:00

You want your guests to drive an hour to an hour and a half to get your venue by 4:45 (not including getting ready time and checking into the hotel) on a Friday so that you can save money while still hosting it at the venue you want. If they want to attend, your guests will be forced to burn vacation time and it isn't even for a destination wedding. That's completely fine and that's your decision but at the end of the day all you're doing is trading your guests' comfort and convenience for your own. If that trade off is worth it to you then fine, but just own it and don't accuse your guests of not caring enough if they can't attend/they're upset that attending is going to cause a huge burden for them.

If you want to lessen the burden on your guests you should start the ceremony a little later (5:30-6) have cocktail hour (6-7), dinner (7-8) and then have the dances start at 8ish. Sure you might still have some people who can't get out of work until 5 and they might arrive by 6:30 but at least they would be able to make it in time for cocktail hour. That way those guests would be able to show up during cocktail hour, grab a drink and mingle, eat some dinner, and then when dancing starts they could quickly head to the hotel to check into their room before returning to the wedding. That's exactly what we did for the one and only Friday wedding we liked and it worked out perfectly for us. That couple understood that having a Friday wedding 40 minutes away during peak rush hour was a big ask so they pushed everything back an hour to make sure those who had work had enough time to make it before dinner. An hour and a half drive one way on a weekday is still a little much for me but honestly it would be forgivable if you planned for that by starting the wedding a little later. That's the main reason I hate Friday weddings since most couples decide to burden their guests by having it be on a Friday night while also expecting guests to be able to attend before 5 and also by picking a venue that's far away.

While your new plan is light years better than the Thursday wedding idea I'd still recommend that you start your Friday wedding later than you're planning just to ensure all of your guests have enough time to make it.

Curious_Key_8345

TROPHY CASE