I was put in charge of invitations and thanks to these bad boys there is glitter everywhere in my apartment (sorry roommates!). A little funny story about these invites, as we were trying to figure out what to write on them as far as RSVPs go, we ended up with
RSVP ASAP yes or no for food assignment.
We thought, that needs one more acronym, why not throw in CREAC? This is where my inner nerd comes out. CREAC stands for Conclusion, Rule, Explanation, Application, Conclusion. It's the format for writing a legal memo. I threw in CREAC just as a funny addition. Imagine our surprise when we started getting RSVP emails like this:
Date: April 8, 2015 at 2:48:27 PM MDTSubject: RsvpFrom: Cami SC: Yes
R: If you get invited to an awesome party you will go.
E: There is an awesome party.
A: I will go.
C: What should I bring?
We thought, "that's adorable!" then we got this one.
& this one.Date: April 8, 2015 at 4:09:13 PM MDTSubject: Re: RSVP for April 16th Finals PartyFrom: Zachary JP.S. I will be sure to notify you if my plans change. I don't currently plan on dying on that day, but finals may change that :)
P.P.S. Did I need to tell you what food I'll bring? If it's up to me, I'll bring a fruit salad.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Zachary J wrote:
I will most likely attend. Social etiquette among colleagues strongly favors attendance of events put on by peers. This is especially strong when doom is impending, such as finals for law school. It is a strong inference compelling attendance, almost a presumption. However, if other considerations, such as previous engagements, sickness, or death, intervene, the invitee is usually not bound.Here, since you are my colleague, and this is an event put on by colleagues, there is a presumption that I will attend. And since there are no intervening situations, as I am not sick, dying, or have other conflicting events for April 16th, I will most likely attend.Yours truly,
By this time we got the greatest idea and thought, "let's GRADE THEM! ON A CURVE!" The current 4.0 as it stands is this gem:From: Tanner BSubject: CREACDate: April 9, 2015 at 8:12:36 AM MDTTanner and his wife, Katelyn, should be able to attend the half-way finals party. During finals, hard-working students deserve food and festivity. Bean v. Cosmo, 17 B.YU 356-67 (2015). In Bean, the court held that two students were deserving of food and festivity where one was a first-year law student and the other a senior of her English major, both slaving away at the university. The court found that their hours of study, combined with a clear showing of sleep-deprivation, evidenced their hard work. Id. The court held that because of their work, they deserved food and festivity. Id. at 358. Thus, Tanner and Katelyn will be able to attend the half-way finals party, full of food and festivity.Additionally, public policy concerns dictate that participants in festivities bring food to the occasion, as it makes for good public conscience and ends famine. Phineas v. Cosmo, 18 B.YU 23-76 (2013). Thus, it is likely that Tanner and Katelyn will bring food to the festivity if the court decides.For these reasons, the court should accept this RSVPASAPCREAC.
From: Michael S Date: Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:03 PMSubject: CREAC RSVP
I will attend Treat Yo Self 2015. I attend any event that looks enjoyable to me, and this is nearly always satisfied if it will also be attended by individuals that I enjoy interacting with.
The controlling precedent for both of these elements comes from the case of My Desire to Socialize v My Laziness. In this case the court held that "Any type of social gathering, barring previous commitments, may be attended if there are going to be people I enjoy interacting with there." My Desire to Socialize v My Laziness, 3 M.S.D.2d 25, 27 (2010). The court went on to clarify this rule in the later decision of Girl I Had the Hots For v Dislike of the Bachelor. The court held that in circumstances, such as a Bachelor viewing party, where the activity involved met a super lameness standard, then attendance was not dictated regardless of any enjoyable parties involved. Girl I Had the Hots For v Dislike of the Bachelor, 5 M.S.D.2d 34, 38 (2012). The court included a romantic relationship exception where attendance was mandated regardless of super lameness, but the present facts do not present a romantic relationship question so it is not necessary to address.
Following the precedent set in Desire to Socialize, it seems almost guaranteed that I will attend. First, I have no previous engagements the time of Treat Yo Self 2015. Second the facts indicate that this event will potentially be attend by, but not limited to: Laura S., Kathryn B., Kathryn L., Brooke E., Tye C., Lauren Flores and Zack J.. All of these individuals have been interacted with before, and all interactions were quite enjoyable. The present situation is easily distinguished from Dislike of the Bachelor. In that case the activity involved was a viewing of the show the bachelor, and while the exact activities of Treat Yo Self 2015 are not currently clear, it is obvious by the presence of food and the attending parties listed above that a super lameness argument cannot be honestly presented, let alone met.
Due to my lack of previous social commitments, the enjoyable nature of the attending parties, as well as the obvious enjoyableness of the activity itself, it is a practical certainty that I will attend Treat Yo Self 2015.
Michael A. S., future Esq. (hopefully)
P.S. The things I do when I should be studying...
P.P.S. Cliffnotes of the above is I would love to come, let me know what you would like me to bring.
This has turned into a full-throttle competition complete with a grand prize. We are the nerdiest and I love it!
I go to school with the greatest people.