Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed • Hacker News Board

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#241

Post by asdfman123 » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:50 PM UTC

Pxtl wrote: post #190

derialstrazus wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see where you're coming from, but I think in practice this is not a great idea. Even if it's not intentional, it's not going to be great publicity when you have an app that shows different women with different price tags. I imagine it's not great either if, on current dating apps, the number of messages women receive becomes public information. The problem here is less that different women cost different prices…

There are probably ways you could make it manageable and less morally repugnant. 1) Let people set their own price. Then it's not the platform valuing you, it's how much you value your own time. 2) Provide "auto-pricing" as an optional feature. Use an imaginary unit - call it "stamps" and provide ways to earn "stamps" on the platform besides just buying them. "How many stamps should it cost for somebody to send you a…

And also lots of guys would freak out and get very upset if they perceived someone's price is "too high," which would make the experience more hostile to women.

I've got a better idea. Have a swiping system, but also have a simple indicator to see how often people respond to messages after first swipe. There could also be an indicator for how long those conversations typically last.

Or you could just make it extremely simple: just have something saying "this person is X% likely to respond after a match."

Or an opaque "conversation score" which is hard to game, but indicates whether or not they're actually talking to their matches. You could categorize them as "great conversationalists!" and then allow people to filter out those who aren't.

Of course, that could be gamed too but it would be better than just matching over and over with people who have no interest in actually talking to you.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#242

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:51 PM UTC

nradov wrote: post #234

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My personal experience is that dating itself just a miserable, tedious affair. Online dating at best doesn't make it any better.

Dating is only as miserable and tedious as you want to make it. If you're not satisfied with results so far then change your approach. This may require multiple iterations over several years until you find something that works for you.

Been there, done that, decided it wasn't worth the continued effort.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#243

Post by ballenf » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:51 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #82

jressey wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Survivorship Bias: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias I met my wife online after a year of fruitless first dates. Maybe I'm just unappealing or something but it was truly a miserable part of my life. Edit: I'm gonna add in here that most people don't have the stick-to-itiveness that most readers of this site do.

It's not survivorship bias if you failed 100 times before your 1 success. It's only survivorship bias if they hit the jackpot and the very first date worked out perfectly and they lived happily ever after. I was grinding away on tinder/going on dates for months before I found success. But that's not the dating app's fault - I was seeing the same thing using non-app strategies.

Survivorship bias is anyone who has had success at a task, regardless of how long it took. The lottery winner who played every week for 40 years will tell you buying a ticket every week is the secret to success at winning, irrespective of the millions of people who do that and never win.

So the grandparent comment did use the term correctly. Unless they were responding to someone who never “won” at the dating game.

The ultimate statistical issue is about the outcome of a task biasing the incentive for testifying about the task. It’s usually winners who are more prone to speak to their approach to the problem than losers, so we don’t know if the winning solution is representative of success or an aberration from the norm.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#244

Post by asdfman123 » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:52 PM UTC

vbtemp wrote: post #34

I had an idea for a dating app a while back, in which the basic idea is that you pay the service to message someone (above a free weekly limit of say 1 msg). The pricing would be reactive - as popular attractive people get more messages, the more it would cost to message them, growing exponentially in order to limit incoming messages to approx a few a day. Unpopular people who got few messages would have a price that…

That would just make it harder for attractive guys who primarily message women in their own league, which could actually result in a worse experience for women.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#245

Post by coupdejarnac » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:53 PM UTC

erikpukinskis wrote: post #64

chroem- wrote: post #36

Dating apps are extremely broken, and yet they're almost all owned by a single company: Match Group. I have a suspicion that these apps are left intentionally broken to keep users fruitlessly searching and boost engagement metrics. I can't find a complete list of the companies they've acquired, but last time I checked, Match owns over 20 different apps and dating sites, including Tinder, OkCupid, and Hinge. We really…

Can you say more about what’s not working? I’ve been with my girlfriend three years, just bought a car together. It’s going well! We met on OKcupid. I’m a happy customer, though I don’t think I’ve ever paid them anything.

I met my last girlfriend on Okcupid several years ago, too.

Okcupid now works like a slightly modified Tinder. It's awful.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#246

Post by hombre_fatal » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:54 PM UTC

tachyonbeam wrote: post #176

abstractbarista wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I absolutely love this idea. Do it. Ignore the grumpies suggesting objectification or privilege. It's a market for attention. Nothing more, nothing less.

Don't you think women would just not use the dating app though? I think most of them enjoy not having to risk approaching guys. It's also known that many women like the ego boost of getting all the attention. I have a hard time seeing how you could convince them to pay to get less attention and force them to make the first move.

The idea seems like an engineer's misreading of women.

A woman getting dozens of low-effort messages knows that the next message she receives could be from her next amazing relationship. Great people are less common than low-quality pussy-beggars. That's just life.

Charging for messages just optimizes for the sort of loser desesperados who are even open to the idea. It really is just a sugardaddy-finder.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#247

Post by coldpie » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:55 PM UTC

asdfman123 wrote: post #229

umvi wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worked for me... met my wife on Tinder, been married 5 years. For me the hard part was just finding new girls outside of my immediate social circle. Tinder just helped me meet lots of new girls I would have normally never met.

I find it's best to take part in some local activity in your city. Just meet as many people as possible, and they might have a friend who fancies you. I was on online dating for years and it was a huge waste of time, but met my fiancée through the local improv community.

I don't think this is the kind of thing you can generalize. I have a very small social life, and I like it that way. I met my wife online (OkCupid, 8 years ago) and I don't think I would ever have met anyone without it. In my opinion, do what works for you and stop doing what you aren't enjoying.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#248

Post by cousin_it » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:55 PM UTC

rgblambda wrote: post #134

nazgulnarsil wrote: post #112

I had an idea for a much more aggressive filtering service called first date. Men's profiles are a video that you only get one chance to shoot in which you are asked a random set of questions that you thus can't prepare for.

Wouldn't they just delete their accounts and start over if it went poorly? Any kind of Proof of Identity verification to stop people doing that would probably put them off signing up in the first place.

Face and voice recognition tech could help against that. I think nazgul's idea is really cool, someone should try it.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#249

Post by capableweb » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:56 PM UTC

Jedi72 wrote: post #114

Jedi72 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually a pretty good idea. I think women would really go for it, since most of the 'matchmakers' are probably other women

lmao, so I just ran this idea by my girlfriend and she said "yeah its good but there would be trolls, I would just put hideous women with hot guys, and vice versa" - so, not so easy to succeed at (also, what a catch my girl is :P)

Make it based on reputation for the matchmakers as well. So if you purposefully do bad matches, you'll eventually not be able to do any more matchmaking.

Re: Greensboro Man Creates Dating App Where He's the Only Guy Allowed

#250

Post by asdfman123 » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 5:58 PM UTC

klipt wrote: post #86

Someone1234 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One idea I've had is to disallow conversation in the app, and instead focus on making date plans if there's a match. You should likely run this idea past a few women. The typical reason they want to converse before meeting is security: Meeting strangers is dangerous and they want to "sniff test" to see if it is safe enough to even go that far. Your app idea largely seems to exist to solve issues men have with datin…

Ironic that people don't want to meet someone off an app without "sniff test" conversation first, yet are happy to meet strangers at a bar with no prior knowledge of them whatsoever. I guess it's just a lingering bias that makes us think "dating app people are creepy" even though today the people you meet in a bar are probably all on dating apps too.

On an app, you can put up whatever profile you want and pretend to be whoever you want. Nothing stops you from impersonating whoever you want, and lots of people are good at making themselves look safe, interesting and fun online, even if they aren't that way in real life.

But as soon as you walk into a bar, every woman in that place is taking in broad bandwidth data on you. Do your mannerisms look natural? Are you acting aggressive? Are you friendly? What are you wearing, and are your clothes clean? Do other women seem comfortable around you?

All of those assessments are based on very finely honed intuitions that they rely on every single day to stay safe.