Etiquette Hell

General Etiquette => Techno-quette => Topic started by: GSNW on May 02, 2013, 05:44:31 PM

Title: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: GSNW on May 02, 2013, 05:44:31 PM
I was listening to my local radio morning show this morning on the way to work. 

The female host (Mercedes) mentioned this as a "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook, and naturally I was curious about what everyone here thinks.  Mercedes says that posting pictures of a bride and groom on FB is an etiquette issue, and the "rule" is that NO ONE in attendance at the wedding should post pictures of the B/G until the B/G have posted pictures themselves... and then, it's open season.

I've never thought about this myself, but I'm not a person who posts photos of every event I'm at.  On one hand, I can see the B/G wanting to "debut" the photos of their wedding themselves.  On the other hand, it seems a little SS to mandate that people to hang on to their photos ("Me and BrideKaty at her wedding this weekend!") until B/G decide it's time to put them out there (if ever, since not everyone does that). 

What do you guys think?

Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: CakeEater on May 02, 2013, 06:09:01 PM
That wouldn't bother me as a bride. I'd be excited to see people's photos.

I think not posting photos that are very unflattering is a more important rule.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Surianne on May 02, 2013, 06:22:12 PM
I think it's best to ask the bride and groom before posting photos of their wedding. 
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Slartibartfast on May 02, 2013, 09:47:52 PM
I had better things to do between my wedding day and my honeymoon than to spend them worrying about getting credit for Facebook photos.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Hmmmmm on May 02, 2013, 10:20:21 PM
I was listening to my local radio morning show this morning on the way to work. 

The female host (Mercedes) mentioned this as a "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook, and naturally I was curious about what everyone here thinks.  Mercedes says that posting pictures of a bride and groom on FB is an etiquette issue, and the "rule" is that NO ONE in attendance at the wedding should post pictures of the B/G until the B/G have posted pictures themselves... and then, it's open season.

I've never thought about this myself, but I'm not a person who posts photos of every event I'm at.  On one hand, I can see the B/G wanting to "debut" the photos of their wedding themselves.  On the other hand, it seems a little SS to mandate that people to hang on to their photos ("Me and BrideKaty at her wedding this weekend!") until B/G decide it's time to put them out there (if ever, since not everyone does that). 

What do you guys think?

There was a discussion about this a year ago. I agree with her rule but the majority thought that guests shouldn't be restricted.

I can't find the discussion now.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: MariaE on May 03, 2013, 02:07:02 AM
At my sister's wedding, somebody posted photos from their cell phone immediately following the service, because they were so excited they just had to squee :)

I don't think it's a problem as long as it's informal photos you've taken yourself. If you've somehow gotten hold of the formal wedding photos, then it's a completely different matter.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Katana_Geldar on May 03, 2013, 02:52:58 AM
We didn't mind as we wanted to see them, and it was three months until our professional ones arrived.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: lady_disdain on May 03, 2013, 08:41:01 AM
I wouldn't share pictures of the ceremony, first dance or anything that is specific to the happy couple. I wouldn't think twice before sharing photos of the guests dancing or greeting the couple - in other words, photos that are centered on me and my friends at that wedding.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: earthgirl on May 03, 2013, 09:25:07 AM
At my sister's wedding, somebody posted photos from their cell phone immediately following the service, because they were so excited they just had to squee :)

I don't think it's a problem as long as it's informal photos you've taken yourself. If you've somehow gotten hold of the formal wedding photos, then it's a completely different matter.

I agree.  DH and I left for our honeymoon only a matter of hours after the wedding.  We were excited to see some informal pictures from our friends up on facebook almost immediately.  Since we were on a cruise and had to pay an arm and a leg for internet service, we stayed off of facebook entirely but checked our email once in the middle of the week.  Our professional photographer was super fast and had already sent us a link to all the formal photos, with editing, so we forwarded that link to our close family members.  By the time we got home, I was really annoyed to find that SIL had posted the link to our professional pics on facebook for everyone to see -- while it's not that I didn't want them to be shared, they weren't hers to share. 

Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: #borecore on May 03, 2013, 09:59:19 AM
My wedding is in 2 weeks, and I wouldn't dream of dictating how my guests treat it on social media. They are sharing their experiences, not dictating mine.

That said, I might feel different if they post a photo with a caption like, "Omgosh, look at the world's ugliest bride at the stupidest wedding ever!" But I do not plan to invite anyone like that!
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Lynn2000 on May 03, 2013, 10:14:26 AM
To me, this seems like one of those things where if a bride or someone says, "You, don't do this!" I would roll my eyes and think them very dictatorial. But if I read from a neutral third party that "the advice is to not..." I would think, hmm, that's a good idea, I'll try to remember that.

Unless you are making people sign confidentiality agreements or something like that, I just don't think you can ask people not to post pictures of an event you've invited them to, that they took themselves. Personally I'm not ready to make that the standard. I think it's nice to wait until the HC post their own pictures, or to get permission from the HC first, but I don't think it's necessary.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: lady_disdain on May 03, 2013, 10:30:00 AM
Unless you are making people sign confidentiality agreements or something like that, I just don't think you can ask people not to post pictures of an event you've invited them to, that they took themselves.

Oooh, I can just see the small print on the invitation: "by accepting this invitation, you thereby agree to provide one wedding gift of at least $60 dolar vaue (cash preferred); to refrain from announcing any engagement, wedding date, pregnancy or equivalent milestone from this moment until 2 weeks after the wedding; to refrain from posting wedding pictures online before the HC does it."
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Judah on May 03, 2013, 10:35:44 AM
I think the only "Cardinal Rule" on Facebook is that there really are no hard and fast rules on Facebook that are different than our usual rules for getting along with people in the real world.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Lynn2000 on May 03, 2013, 10:58:11 AM
Unless you are making people sign confidentiality agreements or something like that, I just don't think you can ask people not to post pictures of an event you've invited them to, that they took themselves.

Oooh, I can just see the small print on the invitation: "by accepting this invitation, you thereby agree to provide one wedding gift of at least $60 dolar vaue (cash preferred); to refrain from announcing any engagement, wedding date, pregnancy or equivalent milestone from this moment until 2 weeks after the wedding; to refrain from posting wedding pictures online before the HC does it."

Ha! Actually I can imagine some situations where more extreme measures might be warranted, but they wouldn't apply to the vast majority of HCs. Like if someone is a celebrity who's made a deal to sell their wedding photos exclusively to People magazine--probably lowers their street value if Aunt Matilda posts pictures of the dress and cake on Facebook that evening. If we aren't at that level, then I don't think the HC can really say anything.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Cz. Burrito on May 03, 2013, 11:17:37 AM
I agree with the rule, unless you know for sure that the Bride and Groom don't mind.  I wouldn't want to bother them to ask, so I would just not post photos until they had posted some themselves unless I know that they are the sort to not mind.  A lot of people probably wouldn't mind candids being posted, but I wouldn't want to unnecessarily step on toes over a photo on Facebook.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: blarg314 on May 05, 2013, 12:55:24 AM

I think it is polite to ask before posting pictures of someone else's personal event - like a wedding, or baptism, or bridal shower.  Some people care a lot, some people don't, so it's reasonable to ask.

But I wouldn't call it a cardinal rule of Facebook. The cardinal rule of Facebook is

"If you post something, do it with the expectation that anyone, including your boss, your parents and your enemies, can see it."

Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Awestruck Shmuck on May 05, 2013, 01:56:31 AM
I went to a wedding recently and there was an instagram hashtag on the reception entry/welcome sign! This was so people could all post pictures in the one spot.

I'm getting married next year and while I'm a little nervous of dodgy/bad photos being put up, I don't think I can dictate who does what with their photos! I have in the past, requested that REALLY dodgy photos of me be removed from FB (via private message, keeping things light and polite) - which is not always received well, but I'm sorry, I'm not okay with having my messy-hair-big-grin-marred-by-spinach-in-teeth self splashed around. My little sister does not get this!

I will probably have a quiet word to the few people that will bring a smart phone to the wedding, well before hand. we're only having 40 people there, and maybe 60% are over 70 or under 12, so not likely to have an iphone handy  :P
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: menley on May 05, 2013, 03:39:50 AM
I think this goes to how people use Facebook in general. For example, my friends (or at least the ones that I interact with regularly on Facebook) have no problem with almost any photos going on Facebook. Sometimes when we're hanging out, if there has been too much alcohol consumed ;) people will specifically say "eek, no photos on Facebook tonight!" But unless someone specifically says, the group philosophy seems to be "I'll upload them and let the others untag themselves if they feel uncomfortable with it."

Now, the main reason this works for me is that I seem to have an exceptionally considerate group of friends who specifically look at the pictures to make sure they're flattering before posting them :)

Specific to weddings, unless a bride and groom have specifically requested guests not to post photos, I think most people would assume it was fine without even thinking about it. For better or worse, smartphones have made us a society that is constantly updating the world to our whereabouts and our actions.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Syrse on May 05, 2013, 04:02:26 AM
I'm probably the odd one out here, but when people started posting our wedding pictures, I was a bit annoyed. But then again, it was my mom and of course she posted only those that suggested we were awesomest daughter and mom, while we are anything but  ::)

I agree with an 'it would be polite to ask before you do.'
Many people seem to forget that by privacy law, you're not even allowed to post pictures without consent.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Adios on May 05, 2013, 05:14:11 AM
What if the bride were someone like myself, who has no facebook and avoids an internet presence (oh okay except here), at all costs.  How would I go about asking people not to post pictures of me?

Its funny but since I have virtually no internet presence it wouldn't have occurred to me before this thread that people would put pictures of me up on the net.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Giggity on May 05, 2013, 07:53:53 AM
The female host (Mercedes) mentioned this as a "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook, and naturally I was curious about what everyone here thinks.  Mercedes says that posting pictures of a bride and groom on FB is an etiquette issue, and the "rule" is that NO ONE in attendance at the wedding should post pictures of the B/G until the B/G have posted pictures themselves... and then, it's open season. What do you guys think?

Unless she's Mark Zuckerberg, she doesn't get to make rules for Facebook.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Specky on May 05, 2013, 08:17:13 AM
I would never post a picture of anyone without asking their permission first.  I may send them the picture privately.  I also expect people to ask permission before posting pictures of me, but I generally do not give permission for anyone to take my picture.  If somewhere where pictures are being taken, I avoid the camera/photographer and tell the photographer that I do not wish to have my picture taken.  Sometimes, I just leave the event.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: MommyPenguin on May 05, 2013, 09:39:17 AM
I wouldn't have a problem with people posting pictures of themselves at my wedding, but I'd personally much rather the pictures that get posted first be the good pictures by the photographer, and not the red-eye, strange-angle, mouth-open, squinty-eyed pictures that a lot of people I know take.  Otherwise people will probably see the first pictures taken, glance through, satisfy any interest in seeing wedding pictures, and never see the good ones that get posted later.  So I'd much prefer that for the posed shots (and maybe for the special shots, like father/daughter and mother/son dance, cake cutting) the bride/groom get to post the shots first.  Same with a new baby, I'd rather the father/mother get to post the first shots and the grandparents, siblings, and friends wait to post their shots until later.  I also sort of see it a bit as letting the person whose event it is to be the one to make the "announcement" (even if the announcement is pictures and more of a "and this is what it looked like" thing).  But, again, no problem with people posting photographs of their group at the table, or them dancing, or whatever.  Just think they should wait for actual shots of bride/groom and special parts of the wedding.  Wait forever?  No.  But maybe a few days after the bride/groom get back from the honeymoon, unless you know they don't mind because you've talked to them about it.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Twik on May 05, 2013, 01:15:40 PM
The female host (Mercedes) mentioned this as a "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook, and naturally I was curious about what everyone here thinks.  Mercedes says that posting pictures of a bride and groom on FB is an etiquette issue, and the "rule" is that NO ONE in attendance at the wedding should post pictures of the B/G until the B/G have posted pictures themselves... and then, it's open season. What do you guys think?

Unless she's Mark Zuckerberg, she doesn't get to make rules for Facebook.

Absolutely. She may think it's a rule, but I'd love to see her drag out an etiquette book and show where it's so written.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: MrsJWine on May 05, 2013, 04:03:30 PM
I wouldn't call it "The Cardinal Rule of Facebook," but I think it is a good rule of thumb, unless you know otherwise. To me, it's along the same lines as announcing someone's engagement before the couple has had a chance to do it themselves. It's not *quite* as bad, but it's similar. A picture of yourself at someone's wedding? Sure. But posting pictures of the wedding before the bride or groom does seems a bit out of line. Again, though, not THE CARDINAL RULE OF FACEBOOK. More like a kind of good idea not to do.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: thedudeabides on May 05, 2013, 08:36:43 PM
I went to a wedding last summer where the couple had inserts with the programs asking guests not to post any pictures from the wedding to social media for privacy reasons. This bothered me more than I expected because it left me feeling that I couldn't even post pictures just of my girlfriend and I together without violating the spirit of the request. I understand why they asked it - they don't have social media presences anymore and wanted to control how much is out there and possibly public about themselves - but it could have been worded much better, in my opinion.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Hmmmmm on May 05, 2013, 09:49:13 PM
I went to a wedding last summer where the couple had inserts with the programs asking guests not to post any pictures from the wedding to social media for privacy reasons. This bothered me more than I expected because it left me feeling that I couldn't even post pictures just of my girlfriend and I together without violating the spirit of the request. I understand why they asked it - they don't have social media presences anymore and wanted to control how much is out there and possibly public about themselves - but it could have been worded much better, in my opinion.

I'm not a big photo person. I seldom post photos on public media unless someone makes a specific request. So when I read your post, it sounds to me that you feel your desire to be able to post photos of you attending an event hosted by some one else should trump the hosts desire to have no photos of an event they hosted be in social media.

I've read this sentiment many times. One poster here in another thread said they would refuse to attend an event if they were told they couldn't post photos.


Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: MariaE on May 05, 2013, 11:36:49 PM
If the photo only showed thedudeabides and his girlfriend, and the partly was held in a public venue (rather than a private residence) I don't think the hosts have any right (etiquette or otherwise) to ask that such photos aren't posted. They can ask that photos of them aren't posted - and that should of course be respected.

To me it's not a matter of whose preferences trumps whoms (not sure about the grammar there...) but about what people can reasonably ask.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: sammycat on May 06, 2013, 12:10:23 AM
If the photo only showed thedudeabides and his girlfriend, and the partly was held in a public venue (rather than a private residence) I don't think the hosts have any right (etiquette or otherwise) to ask that such photos aren't posted. They can ask that photos of them aren't posted - and that should of course be respected.

To me it's not a matter of whose preferences trumps whoms (not sure about the grammar there...) but about what people can reasonably ask.

Was just coming to say the same thing.

If DH and I attended a wedding and we got a nice photo together, without any sign of the bridal couple in it, I would post it on my (very locked) facebook if I felt like sharing it with my facebook list (which only consists about 60 people, so we're not talking hundreds of followers here).

I would certainly honour the happy couple's request to not to post pictures of them (and the bridal party if they wish), but they have no right to control pictures of other people.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Hmmmmm on May 06, 2013, 08:02:04 AM
If the photo only showed thedudeabides and his girlfriend, and the partly was held in a public venue (rather than a private residence) I don't think the hosts have any right (etiquette or otherwise) to ask that such photos aren't posted. They can ask that photos of them aren't posted - and that should of course be respected.

To me it's not a matter of whose preferences trumps whoms (not sure about the grammar there...) but about what people can reasonably ask.

Will you tag it as "Friend and I at X wedding?"

Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: MariaE on May 06, 2013, 08:05:43 AM
If the photo only showed thedudeabides and his girlfriend, and the partly was held in a public venue (rather than a private residence) I don't think the hosts have any right (etiquette or otherwise) to ask that such photos aren't posted. They can ask that photos of them aren't posted - and that should of course be respected.

To me it's not a matter of whose preferences trumps whoms (not sure about the grammar there...) but about what people can reasonably ask.

Will you tag it as "Friend and I at X wedding?"

Probably not. I seldom tag locations on Facebook.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Hmmmmm on May 06, 2013, 08:16:26 AM
If the photo only showed thedudeabides and his girlfriend, and the partly was held in a public venue (rather than a private residence) I don't think the hosts have any right (etiquette or otherwise) to ask that such photos aren't posted. They can ask that photos of them aren't posted - and that should of course be respected.

To me it's not a matter of whose preferences trumps whoms (not sure about the grammar there...) but about what people can reasonably ask.

Will you tag it as "Friend and I at X wedding?"

Probably not. I seldom tag locations on Facebook.
Then to me that is not posting photos of the wedding. That's posting a photo of you and a friend. If there is no identifiable way of relating it to the wedding, like you standing in front of a sign that says Congrats Jack & Jill, then I would agree and have no issues. And I doubt the B&G in your post would have issue. I would assume they were not wanting photos of them, their wedding party, photos of the ceremony, or photos of things like the wedding cake or other very personal items. 
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: TootsNYC on May 06, 2013, 02:59:15 PM

I think it is polite to ask before posting pictures of someone else's personal event - like a wedding, or baptism, or bridal shower.  Some people care a lot, some people don't, so it's reasonable to ask.

But I wouldn't call it a cardinal rule of Facebook. The cardinal rule of Facebook is

"If you post something, do it with the expectation that anyone, including your boss, your parents and your enemies, can see it."

I agree. With both points.

I just think that when someone else is the host of an event, you should not be rushing to post your versions of it. Be a little slow.

Even, actually, if it's just a party. But especially if it is a big event.

I agree that if it's a pic of YOU at the wedding, you don't have to be quite as reticent.

I would like to see this become a rule. 
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: WillyNilly on May 06, 2013, 03:15:02 PM
I got married last October. We honeymooned in the States and I was so glad I brought my laptop with me - every evening I would go onto Facebook and find more wedding photos posted by friends and family which i right-click saved. I had two photographers, who took between them about 900 photos. I got over 600 additional photos from friends and family off Facebook and Flickr.

Sure it made making my albums more work, but ultimately it made them better because now we had candids, and shots from different angles and some had filters applied and stuff the photographers missed.

It never occurred to me to be upset by the photos being posted! In fact I never posted a single wedding photo on Facebook from my wedding. Two reasons - one I didn't bring a camera (and the professional photo links took a week to be sent to us) and two - I think its rude to post about a party I hosted in front of people I didn't invite (isn't that a cardinal rule?)
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: LB on May 06, 2013, 03:19:18 PM
I always thought it was best to get permission before posting a picture of someone else online. Whether it's at their wedding or anything else.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Hmmmmm on May 06, 2013, 03:38:23 PM
I got married last October. We honeymooned in the States and I was so glad I brought my laptop with me - every evening I would go onto Facebook and find more wedding photos posted by friends and family which i right-click saved. I had two photographers, who took between them about 900 photos. I got over 600 additional photos from friends and family off Facebook and Flickr.

Sure it made making my albums more work, but ultimately it made them better because now we had candids, and shots from different angles and some had filters applied and stuff the photographers missed.

It never occurred to me to be upset by the photos being posted! In fact I never posted a single wedding photo on Facebook from my wedding. Two reasons - one I didn't bring a camera (and the professional photo links took a week to be sent to us) and two - I think its rude to post about a party I hosted in front of people I didn't invite (isn't that a cardinal rule?)

That is one of my reasons I don't post any photos of private events we attend as guests or as hosts. Most people who view the photos wouldn't expect an invitation. But if I host a small backyard bbq for 4 neighbor families there is a strong possibility another friend is also a facebook friend of their's and might wonder why I didn't invite them too. Or cousin Cindy hosts a lunch for her mom and invites a few friends and a couple of close cousins and suddenly your getting a call on why Cindy didn't invite cousin Tom. 
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: angel17 on May 06, 2013, 05:06:22 PM
I got married last October. We honeymooned in the States and I was so glad I brought my laptop with me - every evening I would go onto Facebook and find more wedding photos posted by friends and family which i right-click saved. I had two photographers, who took between them about 900 photos. I got over 600 additional photos from friends and family off Facebook and Flickr.

Sure it made making my albums more work, but ultimately it made them better because now we had candids, and shots from different angles and some had filters applied and stuff the photographers missed.

It never occurred to me to be upset by the photos being posted! In fact I never posted a single wedding photo on Facebook from my wedding. Two reasons - one I didn't bring a camera (and the professional photo links took a week to be sent to us) and two - I think its rude to post about a party I hosted in front of people I didn't invite (isn't that a cardinal rule?)

You didn't post pictures because you didn't want to post about party to people you didn't invite but if all the pictures were tagged with your name then all of your FB friends still saw the pictures.

That is the main reason why I don't like when people post so many pictures of someone elses event. Why do all of your friends need to see pictures of someone elses event? More importantly why would you presume that everyone on the Bride/Groom's friends list want to see immediate pictures of event they were not invited to? Guest list are hard enough and not everyone chronicles their life statuses as soon as they happen (or keeps FB for just one circle of close friends). I've been to plenty weddings where co-workers/distant families etc did not know about wedding until afterwards when relationship status changed and/or select pictures posted.

To me the rule should be know your audience. If a couple has hashtags up or openly encourage photos then go for it. But if you are with couple that has been parse with wedding talk on FB then respect that and let them announce their news as they see fit.  You can share links to photos (or actual ones) with the couple without FB.

I have family members that refuse to respect my low profile so I no longer take any pictures with them.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: thedudeabides on May 06, 2013, 07:31:21 PM
I went to a wedding last summer where the couple had inserts with the programs asking guests not to post any pictures from the wedding to social media for privacy reasons. This bothered me more than I expected because it left me feeling that I couldn't even post pictures just of my girlfriend and I together without violating the spirit of the request. I understand why they asked it - they don't have social media presences anymore and wanted to control how much is out there and possibly public about themselves - but it could have been worded much better, in my opinion.

I'm not a big photo person. I seldom post photos on public media unless someone makes a specific request. So when I read your post, it sounds to me that you feel your desire to be able to post photos of you attending an event hosted by some one else should trump the hosts desire to have no photos of an event they hosted be in social media.

I've read this sentiment many times. One poster here in another thread said they would refuse to attend an event if they were told they couldn't post photos.

No, actually, I felt like my desire to post a nice picture of myself and my girlfriend dressed nicely, with no reference to the event itself, was overridden by the happy couple's desire to keep their event off social media. Could I have posted that? Probably, but I felt that would still be going against their request that no photos period be posted.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Adios on May 06, 2013, 10:27:46 PM

 
No, actually, I felt like my desire to post a nice picture of myself and my girlfriend dressed nicely, with no reference to the event itself, was overridden by the happy couple's desire to keep their event off social media. Could I have posted that? Probably, but I felt that would still be going against their request that no photos period be posted.

Perhaps if this situation arises again, you could take a photo before you go?

I wonder if its the sort of thing that you wouldn't have thought twice about before, but they brought it up in such a manner that
it became rude.  Can you remember what the wording was?
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: MariaE on May 07, 2013, 01:05:36 AM
That is the main reason why I don't like when people post so many pictures of someone elses event. Why do all of your friends need to see pictures of someone elses event? More importantly why would you presume that everyone on the Bride/Groom's friends list want to see immediate pictures of event they were not invited to? Guest list are hard enough and not everyone chronicles their life statuses as soon as they happen (or keeps FB for just one circle of close friends). I've been to plenty weddings where co-workers/distant families etc did not know about wedding until afterwards when relationship status changed and/or select pictures posted.

The bolded is an interesting concept and not one I've encountered before. When I post photos of somebody else's event, I don't do it for my friends to see - I do it for the sake of the person whose event it was, and the other people who were present, because I assume that they would want to see.

Similarly I'm grateful when friends post photos of events where I was present and even more of my own events, because I want to see their photos of the day - especially if I've for some reason been unable to take some myself.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: sammycat on May 07, 2013, 01:22:27 AM
When I post photos of somebody else's event, I don't do it for my friends to see - I do it for the sake of the person whose event it was, and the other people who were present, because I assume that they would want to see.

Similarly I'm grateful when friends post photos of events where I was present and even more of my own events, because I want to see their photos of the day - especially if I've for some reason been unable to take some myself.

Exactly my thoughts!
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Hmmmmm on May 07, 2013, 06:54:00 AM
That is the main reason why I don't like when people post so many pictures of someone elses event. Why do all of your friends need to see pictures of someone elses event? More importantly why would you presume that everyone on the Bride/Groom's friends list want to see immediate pictures of event they were not invited to? Guest list are hard enough and not everyone chronicles their life statuses as soon as they happen (or keeps FB for just one circle of close friends). I've been to plenty weddings where co-workers/distant families etc did not know about wedding until afterwards when relationship status changed and/or select pictures posted.

The bolded is an interesting concept and not one I've encountered before. When I post photos of somebody else's event, I don't do it for my friends to see - I do it for the sake of the person whose event it was, and the other people who were present, because I assume that they would want to see.

Similarly I'm grateful when friends post photos of events where I was present and even more of my own events, because I want to see their photos of the day - especially if I've for some reason been unable to take some myself.
I like my photobug BILs approach which is to set up private album and invite people.

edited to correct typing mistakes.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: WillyNilly on May 07, 2013, 09:03:16 AM
That is the main reason why I don't like when people post so many pictures of someone elses event. Why do all of your friends need to see pictures of someone elses event? More importantly why would you presume that everyone on the Bride/Groom's friends list want to see immediate pictures of event they were not invited to? Guest list are hard enough and not everyone chronicles their life statuses as soon as they happen (or keeps FB for just one circle of close friends). I've been to plenty weddings where co-workers/distant families etc did not know about wedding until afterwards when relationship status changed and/or select pictures posted.

The bolded is an interesting concept and not one I've encountered before. When I post photos of somebody else's event, I don't do it for my friends to see - I do it for the sake of the person whose event it was, and the other people who were present, because I assume that they would want to see.

Similarly I'm grateful when friends post photos of events where I was present and even more of my own events, because I want to see their photos of the day - especially if I've for some reason been unable to take some myself.

Like I said I didn't post any photos of my wedding, but yeah I did like seeing all the posted pictures! The whole day was a whirlwind for me and there's no way I could be everywhere at once - I loved getting to see what happened at tables when I wasn't visiting with them, and on the dancefloor, and out on a terrace, etc!
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Sterling on May 14, 2013, 01:08:43 PM
As with many things it depends.

When I got married I had a small nontraditional ceremony.  I had no issue with people posting pics of the reception but the ceremony itself was something very private and I didn't want them public.  Before the ceremony We did have an announcement made asking people to refrain from taking pictures of the ceremony or the alter.  And still a few cell phone shots escaped.  I chose not to be to upset but I admit I was irritated.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Lynn2000 on May 14, 2013, 03:25:11 PM
As with many things it depends.

When I got married I had a small nontraditional ceremony.  I had no issue with people posting pics of the reception but the ceremony itself was something very private and I didn't want them public.  Before the ceremony We did have an announcement made asking people to refrain from taking pictures of the ceremony or the alter.  And still a few cell phone shots escaped.  I chose not to be to upset but I admit I was irritated.

That would be frustrating. I do think there's a difference between an event where the "host" wants to be the first to post pictures of it, and an event where the host specifically says no photos at all should be taken or wants all photos to remain private forever. If someone posts photos early in the first instance, well, maybe the host is annoyed but personally I think it's ambiguous as to whether they are really being rude. If someone posts photos in the second instance, I think that's much worse, because it completely disrespects the host's wishes for privacy, especially if it's due to some kind of cultural or religious belief. But, I might be oversensitive on that point; there's a cultural group near us that is not allowed to have their pictures taken, and it really bugs me when tourists or even locals who should know better try to "sneak" photos of them.  ::)
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: hobish on May 14, 2013, 06:13:32 PM
I went to a wedding last summer where the couple had inserts with the programs asking guests not to post any pictures from the wedding to social media for privacy reasons. This bothered me more than I expected because it left me feeling that I couldn't even post pictures just of my girlfriend and I together without violating the spirit of the request. I understand why they asked it - they don't have social media presences anymore and wanted to control how much is out there and possibly public about themselves - but it could have been worded much better, in my opinion.

I'm not a big photo person. I seldom post photos on public media unless someone makes a specific request. So when I read your post, it sounds to me that you feel your desire to be able to post photos of you attending an event hosted by some one else should trump the hosts desire to have no photos of an event they hosted be in social media.

I've read this sentiment many times. One poster here in another thread said they would refuse to attend an event if they were told they couldn't post photos.

No, actually, I felt like my desire to post a nice picture of myself and my girlfriend dressed nicely, with no reference to the event itself, was overridden by the happy couple's desire to keep their event off social media. Could I have posted that? Probably, but I felt that would still be going against their request that no photos period be posted.

I think they have the right to make this request.
>sigh< Yet another reason to elope. If i want to invite my friends to come share in a special day with me, while i feed and entertain them, then I come off as some kind of witch because i don't want pictures of it posted on the internet?  >:(

Is there a way to put that in the invitation?
If you absolutely must post pictures on social media, and will feel put out and think bad thoughts at me if requested not to, please do send regrets. Ta.

That would really tick me off. You want to post pretty pictures of yourself? Host your own event and do as you please.



Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Saki_Fiz on May 14, 2013, 08:18:54 PM
I always thought it was best to get permission before posting a picture of someone else online. Whether it's at their wedding or anything else.

This is where I land on the subject.  I always ask, and my good friends know to ask me each time.  If you aren't a good enough friend to know to ask, then I'll probably refuse to take photos with you.

ETA: And yes, I would have been extremely irritated if people had posted photos of my wedding on Facebook. It would be like if they posted them on a giant billboard on a major highway without my permission.  I don't really want tons of strangers seeing my photos.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: thedudeabides on May 18, 2013, 09:51:56 AM
I went to a wedding last summer where the couple had inserts with the programs asking guests not to post any pictures from the wedding to social media for privacy reasons. This bothered me more than I expected because it left me feeling that I couldn't even post pictures just of my girlfriend and I together without violating the spirit of the request. I understand why they asked it - they don't have social media presences anymore and wanted to control how much is out there and possibly public about themselves - but it could have been worded much better, in my opinion.

I'm not a big photo person. I seldom post photos on public media unless someone makes a specific request. So when I read your post, it sounds to me that you feel your desire to be able to post photos of you attending an event hosted by some one else should trump the hosts desire to have no photos of an event they hosted be in social media.

I've read this sentiment many times. One poster here in another thread said they would refuse to attend an event if they were told they couldn't post photos.

No, actually, I felt like my desire to post a nice picture of myself and my girlfriend dressed nicely, with no reference to the event itself, was overridden by the happy couple's desire to keep their event off social media. Could I have posted that? Probably, but I felt that would still be going against their request that no photos period be posted.

I think they have the right to make this request.
>sigh< Yet another reason to elope. If i want to invite my friends to come share in a special day with me, while i feed and entertain them, then I come off as some kind of witch because i don't want pictures of it posted on the internet?  >:(

Is there a way to put that in the invitation?
If you absolutely must post pictures on social media, and will feel put out and think bad thoughts at me if requested not to, please do send regrets. Ta.

That would really tick me off. You want to post pretty pictures of yourself? Host your own event and do as you please.

Please show me where I said that they didn't have the right to make the request.  I think it's perfectly reasonable to control your own social media presence.  But leaving your guests to wonder if they can take pictures of themselves, with nothing indicating they were at your event is not polite.  Just say, "Please, no photos of the ceremony or identifying photos from the reception."

And per the italicized, sure that's your right to put something like that in your invitation.  If you want to look like a drama llama.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: Twik on May 18, 2013, 10:03:44 AM
And per the italicized, sure that's your right to put something like that in your invitation.  If you want to look like a drama llama.

Pod.

Here's what I think is the best, in fact the only, way to prevent your wedding photos from showin up on someone else's Facebook - Find out how many of your friends and relatives have Facebook accounts. Do not invite any of them to your wedding.

Other than this, you cannot control it, and you will be much happier if you do not even try. Your wedding is not a Broadway production under copyright, and people will share photos of it. If they're not saying nasty things about it, why worry?
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: perpetua on May 18, 2013, 10:15:04 AM
ETA: And yes, I would have been extremely irritated if people had posted photos of my wedding on Facebook. It would be like if they posted them on a giant billboard on a major highway without my permission.  I don't really want tons of strangers seeing my photos.

Well, they're not 'your' photos if you didn't take them.

General now, not directed at you: I think you can have those feelings about photos from your wedding that you are in, but photos of people *at* your wedding in which you don't appear? No. Not yours to dictate what to do with, IMO, especially if you didn't even take them.
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: hobish on May 20, 2013, 01:24:57 PM

Whoa, you two - is the name calling really neccessary??  :o
Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: amylouky on May 23, 2013, 12:16:36 PM
Well.. I'm of the opinion that you should get permission from people who are in photos to post them, period.. not just weddings.  So, yes, I think it is rude to post pictures of the wedding ceremony and even parts of the reception before the happy couple has a chance to. Now.. pictures of you and your sweetie dancing at the reception? I think that's fine. But pictures of the ceremony, cake-cutting, first dance, toasts, etc. should be up to the bride and groom to post.
It may sound silly, but I think a big reason for this is that the first pictures posted get the most attention. So, if I post a picture of my sister's wedding, I know our mutual friends are going to "like" it and comment on it, and all the fanfare. If enough people do this, by the time my sister gets a chance to post hers, it's just not as special, and a lot of people would probably figure they'd already commented on my pics, so wouldn't bother. So I think I'd be robbing my sister of her limelight.
Also wanted to point out that the OP actually referred to pics of the bride and groom themselves, not of some of the situations that have been brought up in this thread. I think it's reasonable.

Quote
The female host (Mercedes) mentioned this as a "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook, and naturally I was curious about what everyone here thinks.  Mercedes says that posting pictures of a bride and groom on FB is an etiquette issue, and the "rule" is that NO ONE in attendance at the wedding should post pictures of the B/G until the B/G have posted pictures themselves... and then, it's open season.


Title: Re: A "Cardinal Rule" of Facebook?
Post by: MrsJWine on May 23, 2013, 04:29:01 PM
Yeah, there's definitely a difference to me between a picture AT the wedding or reception and a picture OF the wedding or reception. I think pictures at the wedding are completely fine to post, especially if it just looks like a snapshot of people at an unidentifiable party. I think, say, pictures of the kiss at the altar would be a bit presumptuous to post on Facebook without knowing how the couple felt about it.