Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's kind of funny, because despite how vehemently I fight in every argument I get in, this is one of those odd times when I know it's not simply a difference of opinion, it's that I'm right and the opposition is grasping at straws to save face. Probably a bitter and beaten opposition who will deny plain logic til the end of the earth (OMG is that today?!?!) but I'm happy to go to bed tonight knowing that any outside observer could plainly see that one side speaks from reason and the other speaks from desperation.
This is exactly what the 2nd party could do, correct?
There's no difference between the initiator and the other party so there's no reason that the initiator should always foot the bill.
So the second party, instead of saying yes, should say "I'll get back to you", after financially analyzing all the pros and cons of the situation. Because obviously, when the initiator asks they have more information than the second party.
It's kind of funny, because despite how vehemently I fight in every argument I get in, this is one of those odd times when I know it's not simply a difference of opinion, it's that I'm right and the opposition is grasping at straws to save face. Probably a bitter and beaten opposition who will deny plain logic til the end of the earth (OMG is that today?!?!) but I'm happy to go to bed tonight knowing that any outside observer could plainly see that one side speaks from reason and the other speaks from desperation.
So the second party, instead of saying yes, should say "I'll get back to you", after financially analyzing all the pros and cons of the situation. Because obviously, when the initiator asks they have more information than the second party.
It's no different if, say, the 2nd party hates fish and the initiator asks them out for sushi. I assume there's not problem with the 2nd party suggesting another restaurant in that situation. Why is it different if the reason is financial?
I've gone into a restaurant, that'd I'd NEVER HEARD OF BEFORE and walked backed out because it was too expensive, not the kind of food I wanted, etc...
So, if someone invites someone else to a restaurant that they can't afford, or that doesn't appeal to them for any other reason, they can say no.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
quite the romantic paradox you must have found yourself in. However did you locate a restaurant you have never heard of?
My bad...a new restaurant that I'd never been to. I'd obviously heard of it. Driven past it in fact.
and walked backed out because it was too expensive, not the kind of food I wanted, etc...