A controversial wedding invite that splits guests into three groups has the internet up in arms

As the global health crisis rages on, several countries are still under strict lockdowns. Others, however, have begun to ease back into "normal" life, at least as normal as it can get when there is a deadly virus on the loose. In light of this, many group events and celebrations, such as birthdays, receptions, and weddings have had to either be called off entirely or reorganized to allow for social distancing. Married couples-to-be have thus started to downsize; from extravagant parties, weddings have no become more intimate affairs. This means guest lists have also shrunk. One couple in particular, though, decided to get a little more strategic with their invites. When a Twitter user posted the invite to Twitter, all hell broke loose.

They knew that cancellations were to be expected. How many times have you RSVPd to attend a wedding only to realize, in fact, that you actually didn't want to? Similarly, couples plan to host far more guests than those who actually show up so there's enough seating, food, and drinks. With the pandemic still a major threat, this couple decided to go another route. They split their guests into three various groups (A, B, and C) to create a sort of waiting system. If someone from group A declined the invite, that would mean a guest from group B would be bumped up to group A. What do these groups mean, though? Well, they explained that on their invite.

It read, "Please understand that our venue is limited in the number of guests we will be able to accommodate for our wedding day. As much as we would love to have each and every one of you join us on our big day, we are forced to split our guests into groups to ensure we do not surpass our capacity restrictions." Group A, therefore, was asked to "RSVP as soon as possible" because that way, the couple would be able to "extend any vacant seats to additional guests." Those in groups B and C were asked to "keep a close watch" on the couple's wedding website to find out if there was space available. They were also encouraged to decline the invite if they knew they would not be able to join.

In addition to this, guests were also encouraged to "hire a babysitter for the night and leave [their] children at home." Single guests were also asked to forgo their plus ones. All of this was requested so the couple could do their "best to make space for all the guests [they] can." Some found the requests kind of, well, preposterous. Why have a wedding at all if there were so many rigid guidelines? Thriller writer Megan Kelly wrote in a scathing response, "This is a no-brainer. Take my name off your list, don’t expect a wedding gift, don’t send me Christmas cards, and lose my email address and cell phone number. Don’t call, don’t write, no need to keep in touch. Don’t want to see wedding pictures or any future kid pictures. I won’t follow you on Instagram."

On the other hand, some folks were happy to enjoy a more intimate affair with no annoying kids running around. Another user stated, "Given how difficult it must be to plan a wedding in the midst of a pandemic, I can understand why they are trying this. Why is this so horrible? What’s horrible is posting a wedding invitation to sh*t on it. Wish them well for f*ck's sake." So, it's safe to say that the jury's still out on whether the invite was a smart move or just plain tacky. What do you think?