What's sad is that Disney execs have become more and more greedy through the years. When a business keeps a party of two from enjoying a restaurant for the sole reason that a party of four MAY or MAY NOT want that table and bring them more money, it's greed. And that alone sets them up to be "scammed" (if you call paying $35 for a buffet that'd cost $6.99 anywhere else a "scam").
The truth is, this "rule" or "policy" is not stated anywhere in any of the reading material provided to guests by the Walt Disney World Travel Company. Of course not. Critics would make meatballs out of them if they did.
Can you imagine the publicity they'd get if a bunch of single moms and their kids reported walking up to a restaurant podium in WDW only to be told that yes, they have tables available, however since they are only a party of two and would only be spending half of what that family who's still in MK and hasn't yet decided where to go to dinner would spend, they can't eat with Mickey ? That's exactly what they're doing right now, except it's through the phone. And since mosts guests aren't aware of how the reservation system works, they just assume that this CM is indeed telling the truth and that aren't two seats left in that restaurant that night.
Disney may want us to only book tables for our party sizes but no one can break a rule that does not exist.
To really maximize profits, Disney would need to have the exaxt number of tables for the exact parties (including triangle tables) wanting to eat at that restaurant that day and time, but that is unrealistic. Disney and us guests have to deal with the limitations of the tables as well as the flaw in the reservation system. You'll never maximize your profits if you're turning anyone who wants to dine away! The fairest way to handle the adrs is "First Come First Serve". It's pretty standard across the restaurant industry to seat a two party at a four top as needed and I've yet to see a triangle table for three in a restaurant. I don't see why it should be any different at Disney, if you have to nudge the cm to remember to check out all the options, I don't think it's wrong or dishonest.
What's next - we'll have to place our orders 180 days out as well, and if someone who calls after you places a more expensive order, you lose your ressie? "Oh, that's ok, Disney, as long as you're making a bigger profit! It was wrong and evil of me to not order the most expensive menu items, anyway!"

What happens when you go to a regular restaurant? They don't turn a party of 2 away, because they only have tables that fit 3 or 4. Man, sometimes I really wonder where some ppl get off. I mean this doesn't even make sense. And for those of you trying to make her feel bad that now a family of 4 couldn't get in, because she is...HELLO the ADR system is a first call first serve, you should have called first. BTW, I've had 2 Disney CM's tell me themselves that it was perfectly fine to do this, and that the system is flawed when it says there's nothing available for a party of 2, when there are tables for 3 or 4. (Just for the record I have a large party, so I've never had to do this, but found out because of the way they split the tables.) They said that they're working on a system that will show everything available for a particular time (you know how every other restaurant does it.) No ones going to turn down a party of 2 when they have tables available for 4. You're not cheating the system. You called first so you get the table.
Perfectly said!
Okay let me recall some instances if eating in WDW resturants as well as three times just this past week we ate out:
H-E double hockey sticks yeah! There was no way I was gonna turn that down! Someone here has commented that 1900 has "two-top" tables and this may be a problem. My response is: I have never saw a table with only two sides...
