Miss Manners on dining out: "Who should get the check?"

"L G" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...


WTF are you talking about?! You really are a piece of work. Still jealous
because I inherited a house? Okay, I'll indulge you. She drove us because
I'd never been to Charleston and had no idea how to get to the specialized
clinic my cat needed. Happy now? Idiot. BTW, my car only has 20,000 miles
on it. If you even own a car (which I doubt) I'll bet you're congratulating
yourself for having an old junker truck with chains to hold the tailgait
closed. Asswipe.

Jill
 
In article ,
"J. Clarke" wrote:


When the server takes the order, "Separate checks, please."

--
Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
"Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."
Pepparkakor particulars posted 11-29-2010;
http://web.me.com/barbschaller
 
"Kalmia" wrote in message
news:52e08a09-5ab4-4f5e-955a-192f90b83a70@s41g2000vbw.googlegroups.com...

There were situations at work where we'd go out for a group lunch at a
restaurant in a nearby hotel. It was pretty much understood everyone pay
their own way. Separate checks, please. (I'm talking about a group of 10
people.) At this particular lunch someone told the server one check was
fine, we'd just split it. What?! That's not fair. I had a bowl of soup.
This person ordered soup, salad, an entree and dessert. We were at the
table for a good 30 minutes trying to divvy up the check.

Jill
 
In article ,
[email protected] says...

You've missed the point of my inquiry. If one is supposed to glean from
"I'd like to take you" vs "would you like to go out" that in the one
case the person making the inquiry is offering to pay while in the other
one is offering Dutch, then I would like to know all the other code
words involved in such an inquiry so that I don't fail to communicate.
 
Miss Manners on dining out: "Who should get the check?"

On Feb 14, 4:40?pm, Goomba wrote:



If you're being "invited" and you're not sure what the terms are AND
you're not in the mood to spend money on a restaurant meal, even a
cheap one, you can say: "Sounds nice, but I'm afraid we'll have to go
out some other time - I'm saving money for X, so I'm not spending it
on meals out."

That leaves the other person free to say "no, I want to treat you to
lunch." IF that's what's meant.

Of course, you still have to consider whether you are likely to want
to reciprocate by playing host in the future. If the answer is "not at
all likely" it's not polite to accept a favor you have no intention of
returning.

Lenona.
 
Goomba wrote:

Couldn't be easier, when the take-charge braggart takes a breath from
raging just announce a toast and offer a big THANK YOU for treating us
to dinner. Of course only a pinhead associates with braggarts more
than once. Whenever I find myself in the company of those types I
excuse myself before dinner is served... if asked why I tell the
truth, I say I'm suddenly feeling nauseated.
 
On a somewhat different subject, I'd like to add: There are only two
polite types of potluck gatherings. One is the type where the "host"
and "guest" don't really know each other - such as a community
gathering at a church or a park. In that case, of course, you, as the
"guest," are not expected to reciprocate in the future by inviting the
"host" to your house, so helping out by cooking and bringing your own
dish makes sense. One usually gets the "invitation" by a mass mailing
- or by street flyers.

The other is where there is no "invitation" at all, because the GROUP
decides to have a potluck, not just one person who then inflicts the
idea on everyone else, who may or may not be annoyed at an
"invitation" to a party where no real hospitality is being offered.
(Even if you're really poor, chances are you can serve ice water and
crackers AFTER the guests had lunch or dinner elsewhere.)

The only exception I can think of is the case where the "host" is
bedridden or something similar and therefore will never be able to
come to my house. In that case, I consider it only fair to bring
something, even if I'm not asked to do so.

Trouble is, too many people - who were likely surrounded by shakedown-
artist families as schoolchildren - see NOTHING wrong with sending out
"invitations" to parties and making it clear the "guests" have to pay
cash to the bartender or pay for their own food or theatre tickets,
just because the "hosts" want to live above their means. Thankfully,
it is perfectly polite not to RSVP to such appalling messages, just as
one does not have to RSVP to fund-raiser "invitations" from
strangers.

Lenona.
 
Back
Top