HIS engagement gift!?!

[Rhea]

I gave my husband an engagement gift, a ring actually. That''s what he chose.

I think giving him a gift makes sense. He would have just spend a significant amount of his money on something for you and an engagement is something that both people celebrate.

 

[lala2332]

Date: 12/12/2008 10:56:01 PM
Author: LaurenThePartier

Date: 12/12/2008 7:41:38 PM
Author: lala2332
I''m not sure how I feel about an engagement gift for the guy.

Not to look at things badly, but if it doesn''t work out do you get the enegagement gift back? legally, i don''t think you can, b/c its a gift. I''m not sure how arguing that the true ownership is conditional on the wedding going through, like an e-ring. there just isn''t much precedent for this type of conditional gift, so that might be something to think about.

I''m planning on doing an a much bigger wedding gift for him than he will probably do for me. That is my compromise.

The engagement ring is a condition of a contract (usually unless given on a birthday or Holiday). If that contract isn''t honored, etiquette, and most state laws, dictate that the ring be returned to the purchaser.

yeah, i know the e-ring is a conditional gift. That was the whole point of my post.

I was saying that I''m not sure how you would legally argue that a watch or golf clubs are the same type of conditional gift. Usually those gifts are not considered such. The law is all about precedent, so I''m not sure there is much precedent out there about conditional golf clubs, tvs, watches.

So if an engaged couple were to break up and the ring goes back to him, I''m not sure how much legal ground the female would have to get back your expensive to gift to him. And then the female is out the ring and her gift to the male.

I have done no legal research on this topic, and don''t have time with Criminal Procedure and International Law finals in the next week, it was just a hypothetical that I thought was interesting to think about.

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 12/13/2008 9:49:52 AM
Author: lala2332

yeah, i know the e-ring is a conditional gift. That was the whole point of my post.

I was saying that I'm not sure how you would legally argue that a watch or golf clubs are the same type of conditional gift. Usually those gifts are not considered such. The law is all about precedent, so I'm not sure there is much precedent out there about conditional golf clubs, tvs, watches.

So if an engaged couple were to break up and the ring goes back to him, I'm not sure how much legal ground the female would have to get back your expensive to gift to him. And then the female is out the ring and her gift to the male.


I have done no legal research on this topic, and don't have time with Criminal Procedure and International Law finals in the next week, it was just a hypothetical that I thought was interesting to think about.

I think you'll find that, legal or not, plenty of circumstances exist where rings that should be returned to their purchasers are not, as the example of the broken engagement using an heirloom ring belonging to the family of the male that was not returned.

Besides, that makes it sounds like a woman shouldn't get a man an engagement present because, if things didn't work out, she might be out some money. Aren't there bigger things to worry about if the engagement ends? Are people that worried about it not working out that this is a concern? And if so, how must the man feel if he's making an even larger purchase which he may or may not get back if things go sour?

It all seems to go completely against the state of mind (and heart) behind an engagement to me...

ETA: To clarify: *not* to say that I think everyone should give their boyfriends' engagement gifts--I'm not saying that at all; it's a personal choice. I just find the argument that the woman might be out some money to be a sad reason behind not getting the love of your life something (expensive or not) to show him how much you love him too, y'know? I mean, what if he applied the same logic and didn't want to buy a ring at all because you might break up and he'd be out a few grand if I was bitter and refused to give it back? That would break my heart if J ever told me that! Not because of the lack of ring, but because of the sentiment behind his worry!

 

[elrohwen]

I bought FI a nice watch as his engagement gift. He wouldn''t let me help with the ring even though I make the same amount he does. He only had to pay for the setting, but still, I felt pretty guilty that he was spending all this money. It was a personal decision, but I really wanted to get him something so that I felt like we were both getting something new and special. Plus, when he wears his watch he can think of us the way I do when I look at my ring

I don''t think you *have* to get him a gift, but I think it''s nice to get him something, even if it costs far less than your ring.

 

[lala2332]

Date: 12/13/2008 10:03:33 AM
Author: gwendolyn

Date: 12/13/2008 9:49:52 AM
Author: lala2332

yeah, i know the e-ring is a conditional gift. That was the whole point of my post.

I was saying that I'm not sure how you would legally argue that a watch or golf clubs are the same type of conditional gift. Usually those gifts are not considered such. The law is all about precedent, so I'm not sure there is much precedent out there about conditional golf clubs, tvs, watches.

So if an engaged couple were to break up and the ring goes back to him, I'm not sure how much legal ground the female would have to get back your expensive to gift to him. And then the female is out the ring and her gift to the male.


I have done no legal research on this topic, and don't have time with Criminal Procedure and International Law finals in the next week, it was just a hypothetical that I thought was interesting to think about.

I think you'll find that, legal or not, plenty of circumstances exist where rings that should be returned to their purchasers are not, as the example of the broken engagement using an heirloom ring belonging to the family of the male that was not returned.

Besides, that makes it sounds like a woman shouldn't get a man an engagement present because, if things didn't work out, she might be out some money. Aren't there bigger things to worry about if the engagement ends? Are people that worried about it not working out that this is a concern? And if so, how must the man feel if he's making an even larger purchase which he may or may not get back if things go sour?

It all seems to go completely against the state of mind (and heart) behind an engagement to me...

Sorry...I"m in law school. THis type of question intrigues me.

Gwen, you really take everything I post so NOT the way I meant it. I guess we are just on very different wavelengths.

IF you read my entire post you would see that I wrote that this was just a hypo that I thought was interesting. It was NOT meant to convey that this should be a woman's thought process. I was just saying that the same "safety-nets" of the conidtional gift doctrine that applies with an engagement ring, may not apply to a woman's engagement gift to a man. It was simply an intellectual question that highlights how a woman's engagement guft to a man may not be viewed in the same light as the man's e-ring to the woman. That is all.

 

[Rhea]

Date: 12/13/2008 10:19:52 AM
Author: lala2332

Date: 12/13/2008 10:03:33 AM

Author: gwendolyn

Date: 12/13/2008 9:49:52 AM

Author: lala2332

yeah, i know the e-ring is a conditional gift. That was the whole point of my post.

I was saying that I''m not sure how you would legally argue that a watch or golf clubs are the same type of conditional gift. Usually those gifts are not considered such. The law is all about precedent, so I''m not sure there is much precedent out there about conditional golf clubs, tvs, watches.

So if an engaged couple were to break up and the ring goes back to him, I''m not sure how much legal ground the female would have to get back your expensive to gift to him. And then the female is out the ring and her gift to the male.



I have done no legal research on this topic, and don''t have time with Criminal Procedure and International Law finals in the next week, it was just a hypothetical that I thought was interesting to think about.

I think you''ll find that, legal or not, plenty of circumstances exist where rings that should be returned to their purchasers are not, as the example of the broken engagement using an heirloom ring belonging to the family of the male that was not returned.


Besides, that makes it sounds like a woman shouldn''t get a man an engagement present because, if things didn''t work out, she might be out some money. Aren''t there bigger things to worry about if the engagement ends? Are people that worried about it not working out that this is a concern? And if so, how must the man feel if he''s making an even larger purchase which he may or may not get back if things go sour?


It all seems to go completely against the state of mind (and heart) behind an engagement to me...

Sorry...I''m in law school. THis type of question intrigues me.



Gwen, you really take everything I post so NOT the way I meant it. I guess we are just on very different wavelengths.

IF you read my entire post you would see that I wrote that this was just a hypo that I thought was interesting. It was NOT meant to convey that this should be a woman''s thought process. I was just saying that the same ''safety-nets'' of the conidtional gift doctrine that applies with an engagement ring, may not apply to a woman''s engagement gift to a man. It was simply an intellectual question that highlights how a woman''s engagement guft to a man may not be viewed in the same light as the man''s e-ring to the woman. That is all.

Not that I should admit this, but about three years ago I was watching Judge Judy. There was a couple who had ended an engagement. The woman was ordered to give back her engagement ring. The man was not ordered to give back his car stero system. Judge Judy couldn''t wrap her head around the fact that the woman had given an "engagement" gift to the guy. There was no proof, and he insisted the car speakers were a birthday gift so Judge Judy sided with him. But she also flat out asked why he would get an engagement gift.

For a non-legal point of view, the man may very well get the engagement ring back, but he''s still out of money. He could never sell the ring for what he bought it for, and I doubt a court case would go through qucikly enough to be within the 30 day return policy of most stores. I don''t think Judge Judy not demanding a man give back his engagement gift would ever be enough to stop me giving one.

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 12/13/2008 10:19:52 AM
Author: lala2332
Sorry...I''m in law school. THis type of question intrigues me.



Gwen, you really take everything I post so NOT the way I meant it. I guess we are just on very different wavelengths.

IF you read my entire post you would see that I wrote that this was just a hypo that I thought was interesting. It was NOT meant to convey that this should be a woman''s thought process. I was just saying that the same ''safety-nets'' of the conidtional gift doctrine that applies with an engagement ring, may not apply to a woman''s engagement gift to a man. It was simply an intellectual question that highlights how a woman''s engagement guft to a man may not be viewed in the same light as the man''s e-ring to the woman. That is all.

Ahh, a lawyer! That explains it. (Kidding, kidding!!)

No, I understand the legal aspect of it all. And although finances do play a part (usually) in the engagement process (at least in our cultures), I think the sentimentality and emotion behind it is what should (in my opinion) remain at the heart and soul of the process--which is why I physically feel it in my chest when I hear or read about people being disappointed in their proposals, or ring budgets, or carat size. Although important to a point, that''s not what it''s all about! Thinking of someone who would refrain from gifting her husband-to-be a present because she wouldn''t be legally backed if they broke up later made me feel that same heaviness in my chest.

Also, I have nothing against you (in case you thought so with your comment of my interpretations of your posts)--I tend to be highly sensitive and emotional, and often put myself in the place of ''the other person'' in discussions like these because my boyfriend and I are waiting to get engaged because of me, not him, so I tend to empathize with that other perspective since my situation is at times very similar to it.

 

[lala2332]

whatever

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 12/13/2008 11:00:46 AM
Author: lala2332
turning everything into your situation is not helpful or healthy. Instead of giving people advice on their situations, you are instead projecting your own issues onto them. I think that is why I find your posts so hurtful and argumentative. I honestly have no idea where you get some of the things you write. YOu assume way too much in putting your problems into what someone posted and instead of reading what the poster actually wrote, you instead replace it with whatever is going on in your own life. While, naturally there is some projection in every situation, because we are shaped by our own circumstances, yours seems to go above and beyond.


I am not a heartless witch, i was just looking at the engagement gift process a different way than you do. And instead of trying to understand what I was saying, you instead insinuate AGAIN that I am being materialistic, when in fact I was only presenting the issue in a different way. As in something to THINK about, not something that should drive your decision making process.


And yes, i will be a lawyer in a few short months....thank goodness, because when sentimental saps get themselves in trouble for not actually thinking things through, there needs to be heartless witches like me to help them.

Er, ok....I did not and have not called you a heartless witch or anything along those lines, and as you are free to post your analytical approach to the topic, I am free also to post my emotional one. I did not assume anything about YOU, and try to refrain from making assumptions about anyone. I post my perspective not to be "hurtful" or "argumentative" but because, quite often on this forum in particular, many others DO assume that all ladies in waiting think and feel the same (or at least very, very similarly) when in fact we do not.

I do not believe anyone else has ever found my posts to be purposefully hurtful or argumentative, but if so, I certainly hope they will step forward to let me know, as I post to try to help, not harm.

I find your reaction to my posts rather curious--this is an emotional topic, is it not? Why do you sound surprised I would listen to my heart?

 

[Amanda.Rx]

I told SO that I could probably match what he paid for my ring with whatever "man" toys he wants.

So far, he''s looking at a nice watch and an entertainment room with a LARGE HD plasma TV and surround sound.

He''ll just have to wait until AFTER I graduate, until we have a house, and until I can save the money on my end.

 

[SuiteLady]

I am not going to give him a gift for proposing to me. I will give a gift for the wedding. I doubt that the gift will be of equal value to the engagement ring.

 

[SuiteLady]

Date: 12/13/2008 11:07:40 AM
Author: gwendolyn

I do not believe anyone else has ever found my posts to be purposefully hurtful or argumentative, but if so, I certainly hope they will step forward to let me know, as I post to try to help, not harm.

Well since you have opened the door...I have interpreted several of your responses in topics related to "wedding related materialism" (lack of a better phrase) as argumentative and intended to get those that do not share your views or situation on your level. If you need an example, check out your response in the "carat weight" thread that I started, I think it is on the first page. That is the reason why I was slightly snarky in my response to you. It is all good. Once I read your story, I think that I have gained a greater understanding of your situation. I also learned a valuable lesson in triple-checking my threads before I hit submit

.

Carry on!

 

[Haven]

gwen--FWIW, I''m shocked at the way lala interpreted your post. I reread your first response and see nothing of what she is accusing you of doing in that post, or any others in this particular thread, for that matter.

lala--I did find your tone to be rude and accusatory towards gwen, and thus, extremely emotional. The phrase "kettle, this is pot" came to mind.

 

[lala2332]

I was truly hoping to let all thsi go, but

Haven, Emotional in my response maybe, but I never said I wasn't emotional...I even said I found gwen's posts hurtful. You read gwen's interpretation of my posts, where she again assumes things and projects her issues onto me. You do not have to be analytical or emotinal...it is not an either/or.

My response to Gwen comes from her postings on many topics. As such, this was simply the proverbial hair.

I'm not going to argue with her anymore, but insulting my chosen profession is not the way to garner my respect.

I do find it quite ironic that on a diamond forum someone is so quick to judge others for being materalistic, but alas....that is another discussion for another day.

 

[laughwithme]

Well, I''m gonna side-step the current discussion and offer my response to the original poster....

I won''t get B an engagement gift in terms of, a nice watch or PS3 or something like that. He is very traditional and if I did give him a gift, he might even feel guilty, like "wait, this was a guy thing..." That said, I may make him his favorite meal or treat him to a nice dinner out or something.

 

[glitterazzi]

Date: 12/12/2008 2:21:07 PM
Author: ringisthething
I have been considering this too.... He really wants an Omega watch that is around 5k but I don''t know. That is a lot of $$ and I kind of consider my house the present. I bought a house 2+ years ago and have been pouring a lot of my extra $ into paying it down so he will come into this and I will put it in both of our names, or use the equity that I have built in this home already as a downpayment on a home we pick together. I would imagine it would be less exciting though, he would much rather have the watch since he knows I come as a package deal with a house and a dog already.

Hmmm... now, I hadn''t thought of that - he is getting my house and everything I''ve put into it.

 

[gwendolyn]

Haven, thank you for your support. I really appreciate it.

SuiteLady: I don't think my response to you in your thread was anything other than my personal opinion about your use of the word "need" in relation to an engagement. As an engagement is simply an agreement between two people to marry, anything above and beyond that is by definition not a need but a want. Maybe you don't like me because I responded to that aspect of your post and not what you meant by it, but I honestly don't think anyone *needs* any certain type of anything. That's just my opinion, nothing more, and what was asked of in your thread. I still have my wants (and alas, they aren't cheap!), but they are still only wants. Feel free to disagree with me, but it's not meant as a judgment call about anyone; it's just the use of the word itself that had me twitching. And we got it sorted and there are no hard feelings--at least on my end.

lala: I was making a joke about you being a lawyer, and was overly obvious about it so that no one would think I was slighting you in any way. However, since you interpret it as such anyway, I apologize as it was only meant in fun and as a way to try (and, in this case, fail) to lighten the conversation. YOU are the one who typed up a rude response implying all kinds of things about me and what I allegedly said and then deleted it, replacing it with "whatever" (although it is still saved for posterity as I had quoted it and replied before you deleted it). I have no problem with lawyers, or people disagreeing with me--the whole purpose of a forum is for discussion and debate! Which is precisely what I have done.

Additionally, I don't believe I project "issues" onto you or anyone else. When people offer advice, it all comes from personal experience of some kind. In my opinion, especially on a forum where no one really knows anyone else, it only makes sense to offer the perspective from which you're offering the advice in case it is irrelevant to the person asking for the advice. In other words: if my situation has nothing in common with yours, don't listen to me!



Apologies for the threadjack, glitterazzi.

 

[ozsparkle]

I recently got engaged and had bought a gift in anticipation of his proposal. A pretty confident move

, but I wanted him to also recieve something to mark this special occasion, and like my ring be a sentimental item we could then pass down to our children. I chose to give him a pair of Tiffany cufflinks- a classic gift and something he will wear on our wedding day. I think men really appreciate these sorts of gestures just as much as we do.

 

[mayachel]

My fiance''s job requires him to occasionally dress up. I bought him beautiful silver and faceted garnet cuff links as an engagement gift. I actually gave them to him almost a year before he proposed (what can I say, I thought it was coming a lot sooner than it did)...I''ve even chided him that it isn''t fair that he has been wearing his engagement cuff links all along. They were not in the same price range as a ring, maybe around $300 but I felt it was a substantial, "just because" type gift with some bling. I''d have loved to have gotten him a ring, but he has been constant in saying he''s a one ring guy.

In the end...do what you like.

 

[gryffindor]

FF has often indicated he wants to own a Tag Heuer watch. Since he is buying me a diamond ring, I wanted to keep along the diamond theme and found a hefty Tag chronograph with diamonds studded all around the face. I showed it to him casually at Macys while Christmas shopping a few weeks ago and he approved of it. He keeps talking about wanting the watch but I keep denying I will buy it for him. He believes that I would never spend such a large sum on him because he thinks I am too financially prudent (aka "cheap") so I really don't think he'll see it coming when I do get it. I have to save for a few months to buy it and it costs about 1/3 of what he will pay for the ring. I will probably give it to him a few months after the proposal to give him his own surprise. In my head I think it's cool because I will have the diamond ring and he will have the diamond watch to signify our engagement to each other.

 

[wishful]

I did not get FI an engagment present. However since we got engaged in September I knew Christmas was around the corner and I got him a very nice "big gift" which is a fancy cycling computer (which if I tried to use on my bike - it would simply say "you''re not qualified to use this peice of equipment" on the display..haha.) that he has been really wanting.

It was a bit above and beyond what I would normally spend on him but I felt that it was a nice way to reciprocate all the time, effort, education and of course $$ spent on the ring he got for me.

Also I am getting him a wedding gift. A gorgeous Tag Heuer watch. I have mentioned to him that I have gotten him "something" for the wedding and I have specifically asked him not to get anything for me.

So that''s the way I''m handling it. I think it''s a nice balance!

 

[ringless]

I am going to get my bf something probably a few days after he proposes. I always thought it would be nice to get him something he would enjoy so it is a special time for the both of us. I want to pre-pick out a card and have it ready to give him the day he proposes or shortly after if possible, and the gift a little later on. I think it is a GREAT idea to give them something! They have to feel special too!

 

[musey]

Date: 12/17/2008 1:42:55 PM
Author: wishful
I did not get FI an engagment present. However since we got engaged in September I knew Christmas was around the corner and I got him a very nice 'big gift' which is a fancy cycling computer (which if I tried to use on my bike - it would simply say 'you're not qualified to use this peice of equipment' on the display..haha.) that he has been really wanting.

Wow, now THAT is a cool gift!! My husband would love that.

Also I am getting him a wedding gift. A gorgeous Tag Heuer watch. I have mentioned to him that I have gotten him 'something' for the wedding and I have specifically asked him not to get anything for me.

I loooooooooove tag heuer. Your FI is a lucky man

 

[musey]

Date: 12/15/2008 2:26:37 AM
Author: gwendolyn
Additionally, I don't believe I project 'issues' onto you or anyone else. When people offer advice, it all comes from personal experience of some kind. In my opinion, especially on a forum where no one really knows anyone else, it only makes sense to offer the perspective from which you're offering the advice in case it is irrelevant to the person asking for the advice. In other words: if my situation has nothing in common with yours, don't listen to me!

Apologies for the threadjack, glitterazzi.

I admit that I didn't read most of the back-and-forth in this thread (I've been trying to skip the negativity on PS lately if it doesn't directly involve me). But Gwen, I just wanted to say that I've read many, many of your posts and never once did I see you being rude/snarky/etc. You've been one of the kinder posters on PS since you joined.

I've said it several times in past threads, but it seems that a lot of the negative interpretations of posts comes from newer members, or those that don't post very often. I'll read posts accusing people of writing this that and the other negative thing, and nearly every time that I find myself saying "huh??" it's coming from a newer member. I admit that when I first started hanging out here (I've never really frequented another forum) I did the same thing a few times, myself. I think it takes awhile to figure out how to more accurately read forum posts--because unless you're very specific (hmm, I wonder why my posts are always SO verbose!) there is a LOT of room for misinterpretation.

I'm not trying to pick on you, suitelady and lala, I'm just saying that it may help to give posters the benefit of the doubt while you read. Once I figured out how to do that, I stopped misinterpreting peoples' words and intentions so often. It helped a lot!

I know it's annoying to have people dismiss you as being "new here," and I don't mean to do that at all. I just wanted to share that I think there's a learning curve with communicating this way, and I certainly experienced that when I was "new."

 

[Haven]

Musey--You make great points. I totally agree. (Remember when we had a disagreement so long ago? And here I am now, ditto-ing you on a regular basis.

)

gliterazzi--I wanted to buy my DH an engagement gift, but in the end he decided he didn''t want it. The gift was going to be a Breitling watch.

 

[musey]

Date: 12/17/2008 9:15:41 PM
Author: Haven
Musey--You make great points. I totally agree. (Remember when we had a disagreement so long ago? And here I am now, ditto-ing you on a regular basis.

)

Haha!! Of course I do. I haven't gone back to read that thread, but I'm sure that if I did I'd be so confused by the back-and-forth

Sometimes I just get in an impatient mood, or feel very stubborn about proving whatever stupid point I'm on. Those are the times that I should avoid PS!

 

[princesss]

I can''t remember if I posted or just thought about posting, lol, so here it goes:

I really love the idea of getting BF an engagement gift. I think the ring is a big gift, and I''d like to reciprocate. As Gwen said, the engagement is really about the promise, and that''s really what I love the idea of. (Not that I hate the idea of bling!) Personally, I love any chance I get to spoil him. I''d love to give him a trip, or a really fancy bike. One of those super expensive, train for a biathalon, bike a thousand miles on it kind of bikes. I know it would make him smile, and really excite him, and that gives me butterflies...thinking about exciting and surprising him that much gives me a little thrill.

 

[SuiteLady]

Date: 12/17/2008 9:09:45 PM
Author: musey

I''m not trying to pick on you, suitelady and lala, I''m just saying that it may help to give posters the benefit of the doubt while you read. Once I figured out how to do that, I stopped misinterpreting peoples'' words and intentions so often. It helped a lot!

I know it''s annoying to have people dismiss you as being ''new here,'' and I don''t mean to do that at all. I just wanted to share that I think there''s a learning curve with communicating this way, and I certainly experienced that when I was ''new.''

It does suck to have my posts, feelings and concerns marginalized because my post count is low and my join date is recent, but it happens.

I certainly appreciate the advice. I did lurk here for a LONG time before I joined

(since 2006 when I bought my earrings from Whiteflash) and I have participated in other forums for more than a decade. So, I understand that participating in messageboards are a challenge because you can only interpret someone''s intent from words versus inflection, tone, and facial expression that comes along with face-to-face.

Bottom line - If I have a difference in opinion about a poster it will not affect anyone on this board. There is no cyberwar from my side

. I don''t have any hard feelings towards Gwendolyn. I put on my big girl panties every morning, so I will continue to strive for a peaceful co-existence

. Ultimately, I''m a woman that is waiting on her fiance to gift her with a fabulous ring and I want to communicate with women that are going through the same thoughts and experiences. Unfortunately for y''all the engagement may not happen until March of next year

.

 

[musey]

SL, I didn''t mean to suggest that it''s a "big deal" if you have a disagreement with another poster. It is just a forum, after all. I just wanted to share my experience of what I''ve done in the past, and witnessed others do on here, rather than just blindly coming to gwen''s (or anyone else''s, for that matter) defense. I really didn''t see and haven''t ever seen any animosity or rudeness coming from gwendolyn''s corner, so in my outsider''s opinion it seemed like a simple misunderstanding. Since you and lala were both somewhat on the offensive (with gwen confused/blindsided by it), it seemed to fit with that past experience that I described. Otherwise I would''ve just chalked it up to an escalating disagreement.

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 12/18/2008 6:27:39 AM
Author: SuiteLady

Date: 12/17/2008 9:09:45 PM

Author: musey


I''m not trying to pick on you, suitelady and lala, I''m just saying that it may help to give posters the benefit of the doubt while you read. Once I figured out how to do that, I stopped misinterpreting peoples'' words and intentions so often. It helped a lot!

I know it''s annoying to have people dismiss you as being ''new here,'' and I don''t mean to do that at all. I just wanted to share that I think there''s a learning curve with communicating this way, and I certainly experienced that when I was ''new.''

It does suck to have my posts, feelings and concerns marginalized because my post count is low and my join date is recent, but it happens.


I certainly appreciate the advice. I did lurk here for a LONG time before I joined

(since 2006 when I bought my earrings from Whiteflash) and I have participated in other forums for more than a decade. So, I understand that participating in messageboards are a challenge because you can only interpret someone''s intent from words versus inflection, tone, and facial expression that comes along with face-to-face.


Bottom line - If I have a difference in opinion about a poster it will not affect anyone on this board. There is no cyberwar from my side

. I don''t have any hard feelings towards Gwendolyn. I put on my big girl panties every morning, so I will continue to strive for a peaceful co-existence

. Ultimately, I''m a woman that is waiting on her fiance to gift her with a fabulous ring and I want to communicate with women that are going through the same thoughts and experiences. Unfortunately for y''all the engagement may not happen until March of next year

.

''March of next year'' as in the March that''s 3 months away?!!! Girl, that is no time AT ALL!!! How absolutely thrilling!!!! That time is going to just fly by, and I am so excited for you!!

By the way, is that you now in your avatar? Because if so, you are a total babe.