DEAR MISS MANNERS: I love candid photographs. I also appreciate posed, portrait-like photos. I believe the subjects of these photographs, whether candid or posed, should be given the opportunity to share the images -- or not -- at their sole, unquestioned discretion.

Apparently, however, my version of photography etiquette is not shared by many people.

Due to the plethora of cellphones with cameras, almost every social function is now plagued by celebrants insisting on group photos. Stop everything, huddle, and freeze a smile while someone takes a wide-angle photo of you looking terrible that they can share with the world through social media.

I have made every polite effort to avoid being in these pictures. I quietly leave the room; I drop my napkin and duck below the table; I step behind a taller person (difficult because I am also tall).

These tactics often fail. At my wits' end, lately I have resorted to honesty. I regret to tell you that even brutal candor is ineffective on relentless photo-takers insistent on ghastly pictures.

This concept may be difficult for our "selfie society" to grasp, but there are people who do not want to be in every photo. We do not enjoy seeing ourselves caught in a blink or a sneeze, frozen in a picture that is then posted online and seen by every person we ever met -- including old boyfriends and archrivals from high school.

Please tell these people that "no" means "no" for a photo, just as it does for a plate of anaphylactic shock-inducing catfish.

GENTLE READER: The ubiquitous photographer is one of the great nuisances of our time. Being pressured to pose is indeed a violation of etiquette, even among friends and relatives. So is being photographed unaware and having one's likeness posted without permission.

For that matter, it is also tedious to feel obliged to admire countless photographs that one is sent or shown, whether or not the subject is of any interest.

"No" should mean "no" under any circumstances, trivial as well as serious. Miss Manners has always declared it rude to bully people into doing something they clearly don't want to do, under the insulting presumption that they are just being coy.

Here is a new use for a mask: Turned sideways, it can be used to cover your identifying features.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Suppose I'm planning to serve wine to my dinner guests, but I know that some of them are nondrinkers. When I set the table, should each place be set exactly the same, with wineglasses? Or should I omit the wineglass and provide a water glass at some of the places? I generally have a pitcher of cold water available on the table.

GENTLE READER: You set each place with a water glass and a wineglass, and let your guests who want wine pour it for themselves. Miss Manners promises you that if you set each place for each person's exact habits, some will change -- either habits or places.

(Please send your questions to Miss Manners at her website, www.missmanners.com; to her email, dearmissmanners@gmail.com; or through postal mail to Miss Manners, Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106.)

DEAR MISS MANNERS: We love having a Little Free Library in our front yard. We enjoy seeing neighbors and passersby look through the books, take one or two, and maybe make a special trip to leave a few that they're finished with. We've received thank-you notes from people who appreciate our little library.

However, a pair of women have started roaming our neighborhood, emptying all the Little Free Libraries into large bags that they carry. Eventually it got to the point that our library was being emptied every few days. We saw them this morning, carrying bags stuffed with books, and confronted them.

They were extremely belligerent. One claims that she takes them to give to her students, meaning she either has several hundred students, or they all read a few dozen books at a time. They also seem to have tastes ranging from beginning-reader books to Stephen King thrillers to romance novels to cookbooks. I'm pretty sure they are all being sold somewhere.

The woman who did most of the talking claims that the word "free" on the library entitles her to take as many books as she wants. I agree that she should take as many books as she wants to read, but she readily admits she is not reading them.

We put a "Closed" sign on our library, but may try opening it again in the near future with a little sign in the window outlining some rules. But really, I don't know what to do. It isn't a police matter, and in the grand scheme of things it's not that important, but I can't stand these two women feeling entitled to take all of the books in the neighborhood.

GENTLE READER: Congratulations on your newfound status as a librarian. You have already noticed that the job comes with the right to dictate the rules, if not the enviable ability to shush people (although what you do behind closed doors is up to you).

Miss Manners suggests that you take advantage of this right and indeed post signs: "Please help yourself to one or two books, then return or replace them for others' enjoyment when you can."

You might also take out the word "free" from the title. It will still be implied, but its absence may, perhaps, prove less likely to make hoarders out of borrowers.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: As a general rule, are men's jeans and men's cargo pants considered to have the same level of "dressing down"?

GENTLE READER: While Miss Manners does not subscribe to the popular idea that there is such a thing as "good jeans," she does acknowledge that clean, dark, untorn jeans worn with a button-down shirt are marginally more dressy than cargo pants -- if only for the reason that cargo pants are so often stuffed with garden tools and bottles of beer. They are also prone to being accompanied by "man sandals" -- something that she will never concede are socially acceptable outside of beaches and one's own dimly lit home.

(Please send your questions to Miss Manners at her website, www.missmanners.com; to her email, dearmissmanners@gmail.com; or through postal mail to Miss Manners, Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106.)

DEAR MISS MANNERS: We have a weekly ladies' group that meets for coffee. As a result of COVID-19, we haven't met in quite some time. We announce our meetings on a social media group page because we would like the group to be open to new people who might be interested.

However, there is a lady who often overshares and divulges information about others that is private. As a result, she is not well-liked by any of the other group members.

Most of us have subtly communicated that we would prefer not to spend time with her (by being busy when she reaches out, or simply not following up with her about getting together). She doesn't seem to be able to read the writing on the wall.

Is there a mannerly next step? Is there something more than hinting, but less than overtly saying, "We would prefer that you didn't come to our group"?

Last year, when some precipitous events occurred, I let her know, directly but respectfully, that I was not comfortable with some of her behavior. She is just quite committed to spending time with us despite this.

I am not sure what, besides simply tolerating her, there is to do. Can you see something I am missing?

GENTLE READER: Yes. That she is reading the writing on the wall.

Your social media wall. Where she is able to see when and where the meetings are being held.

Therein lies the somewhat obvious problem. Miss Manners understands that you want the group to be open to new members, but this sort of public invitation means that anyone can join. And clearly, you would like to be more selective.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My husband and five of his male friends have a longstanding, semimonthly game night they take turns hosting. When my husband hosts, the players arrive after our young children are in bed and stay until midnight.

These games can get rowdy and bawdy, so I usually say hello when they arrive, then withdraw upstairs for the evening.

The most recent time my husband hosted, he suddenly became very ill with a high fever halfway into the evening. He told his friends to continue playing, and then went to bed, leaving them alone downstairs.

What was the right thing for me to do in that situation? I was already in my pajamas and tucked in for the night. Should I have left the guests alone to play while we all slept, and hoped they'd show themselves out? Or should I have dressed and sat up with them, feeling like a hall monitor?

In the end, I got up, waited until a natural stopping point and asked if they could continue the game another night. It was awkward. I trust these guys to have run of our house, but it just felt wrong to leave guests unattended. Was there a better way to handle this?

GENTLE READER: Yes, but not by you. Your guests should have left the moment your husband declared himself unwell.

Miss Manners wonders at their flagrant disregard for his and their own health -- particularly in the current climate, when a high fever could be the symptom of something very serious. These men must really take their gambling seriously.

(Please send your questions to Miss Manners at her website, www.missmanners.com; to her email, dearmissmanners@gmail.com; or through postal mail to Miss Manners, Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106.)