Four late cancellations changed the group plan every time. Leaving one person off a dinner invite is a reasonable boundary when the table and head count need a real commitment.
Judge it here
Protect the head count — or give the unreliable friend one more conversation first?
Finding out through a photo turns a planning boundary into a public-feeling exclusion. The friend deserved one direct conversation before the invite disappeared.
Pick once. Your call records immediately; the crowd stays hidden until then.
Editorial frame preview · friends
Am I wrong for not inviting a friend who cancels every plan?
A friend has canceled the last four group plans, usually a few hours before we meet. I stopped inviting them to a weekend dinner because I needed a reliable head count and did not want another empty seat. They found out through a photo and said I should have talked to them before quietly leaving them out.
The question
Protect the head count — or give the unreliable friend one more conversation first?
UR WRONG separates the two accounts from the crowd's judgment. Read the frame, make your call, then compare it with the live jury.
Three editorial voices
Same moment. Different rule.
The Blunt One · NOT WRONG
An invitation is not an unlimited reservation. Four late cancellations are a pattern, and the group can plan around what actually happens.
The Empath · BOTH WRONG
The friend made the plans unreliable, but finding out from a photo makes the exclusion feel like a verdict rather than a boundary.
The Rule-Keeper · NOT WRONG
You can stop building plans around someone who repeatedly cancels, but say plainly that future invitations depend on a real commitment.
Have a disagreement that needs a fair frame?
Invite the other side, keep each account separate, and let people who know neither of you decide.