41–50 of 233 posts
Physical wedding invitations are still tradition such that people may get offended if they do not get one in the mail.
For the whole pipeline, you should also connect: Tinder + your calendar app + Opentable to automate the dating process. The output of that can be the input of this.
But an SMS invite I most likely would get back to you within a day, most likely, possibly within ten minutes. For people like me, it's so much easier and much lower friction to respond to a text.
I can be just as bad with email. My parents get responses from me a lot more quickly now that they've started getting into the habit of texting (yes, it's taken that long).
In my opinion, this makes the whole process very impersonal. I invited people to my wedding because I care about them and wanted them to share that day with me. Although it was a lot of effort, I was happy to make save the dates, invitations, and hand write thank you notes to every singe one of them. If you're not willing to do that, then you're inviting too many people in my opinion.
If and when I get married I probably won't take it to this extreme, but I can imagine it might be nice to use some sort of CRM to manage my communications with all the guests and wedding vendors.
It's a great CRM for the sort of thing you're considering.
In my opinion, this makes the whole process very impersonal. I invited people to my wedding because I care about them and wanted them to share that day with me. Although it was a lot of effort, I was happy to make save the dates, invitations, and hand write thank you notes to every singe one of them. If you're not willing to do that, then you're inviting too many people in my opinion.
>invites are not environmentally friendly As opposed to the sustainability of dozens of people traveling from near and far.
They're doing what they can. Are people now supposed to not have weddings because it offends environmentalists' delicate sensibilities?
To be a little more accurate, "They're doing what they choose to." Nobody does what they can.
My problem is in even saying that this is an environmental decision, like that matters at all.
Why do you need to "automate" an action you're expecting to perform, in the happy case, once in a lifetime?
>invites are not environmentally friendly As opposed to the sustainability of dozens of people traveling from near and far.
I don't understand the mentality expressed in the article, where environmentalism is only observed for tiny pieces of waste that don't matter. These same people (like you mentioned) fly dozens of people on airplanes, which is so much worse. Or they have kids or don't update their home's insulation or drive a gas-guzzler. At the end of the day, there's only so much you as an individual can do (and certainly the CEO of…
Micro-optimizations are often easier to wrap our heads around, so we tend to want to focus on them. They're also often situations where you can get a clear win rather than a much more imperfect improvement. In development, it's sometimes called bikeshedding. You see it often in financial planning where people would rather cut out their morning latte than focus on investing better.
This behavior makes little sense, but it does appear to be a fundamental human tendency and those who are better able to maintain perspective definitely have a huge advantage in life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're doing what they can. Are people now supposed to not have weddings because it offends environmentalists' delicate sensibilities?
>They're doing what they can To be a little more accurate, "They're doing what they choose to." Nobody does what they can. My problem is in even saying that this is an environmental decision, like that matters at all.