Live data from Hacker News

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

wfmynews2.com

321–330 of 416 posts

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

#321
Since we're all discussing our dating app ideas, here's one I've had:

Why does your interaction with the app end with the messaging thread? It feels like every app decides that once you've been "connected", that's the end of their responsibility.

I'd like to see an app that takes a more holistic approach: A good algorithm gets you connected, allows you to communicate but also helps set up the first (and second? or third?) date(s). Then gathers feedback on the dates -- what went well, what didn't, and uses that input to refine the matching algorithm (if necessary).

The key here is that the current crop of apps aren't really "dating" apps - they're "first introduction" apps. Getting involved in the whole process could (maybe?) lead to better outcomes.

This is of course assuming that the goal is better outcomes -- as other commenters have pointed out, some companies don't actually want that, they just want you endlessly scrolling (and subscribing). But assuming you build a business that does truly want to optimize for successful outcomes, this could be a start...

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

#322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I used the old OkCupid for years and met a few new friends through it. It tended to match me up with people already in my "friends of friends" extended circles, with good quality common interests and attitudes, and was great for expanding those circles. I thought it was one of the best sites on the net for getting to know new people. (Way better than, say, Facebook, where you exchange comments but never real…

I'm sure plenty of HNers can give you tips for making friends on Tinder: you simply fail to attract the opposite person. ;)

Tinder is completely different. Initial matching is based on looks, and the emphasis is on dating/sex rather than friendship.

OkCupid was based on knowledge and attitudes as well, using a type of machine-assisted learning that deduced what people really find important to know about each other. Rather than what someone designing a questionaire assumes. And rather than people relying on looks, impulsive attraction, and random early conversations where people are winging it.

The central idea, in addition to free-form profiles, was users submitted a lot of answers to multiple-choice questions, as well as the answers they would like a potential match to have (because they might be different), and how important each answer was to them. So this worked well for people who were looking for attributes that complemented theirs, in addition to other attributes where similarity was what mattered.

In addition, users could submit questions, and over time the system grew to mainly ask those questions that were found to be statistically useful in matching people up.

This meant great questions for matching would rise to the top of the pool, while poor questions, or badly written ones, or unhelpfully ambiguous ones, would not.

This also meant that the kinds of things people ended up matching on were more diverse than any other site. So it really helped people find matches on non-mainstream attributes that mattered to them personally, that were not generally reflected on other sites (such as match.com...). Things like how much do you like your partner to dress as a goth, do you mind if your partner sleeps with other people too, and if not what about cuddling others without sex, not just what's your orientation, but effectively what subtle aspects of orientation that haven't been formally enumerated, does it bother you if your partner supports a particular type of politics, what about bedtimes, what is your approach to raising children (smack or never smack), do you like drugs and if so what kind, etc. Basically anything you can think of which humans actually care about.

It was an excellent way to find people that shared your attitudes and worldview, especially if you had non-mainstream interests.

Tinder will give you none of that.

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

#323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TBH, I don't really think it has much to do with who owns them. The reason people are dissatisfied has to do with the fundamental experience of using an app to find love in the first place. Apologies for not having a link, but there has been a good amount of research that shows that the rise of apps and the internet has made it much less likely for people to date outside of their "attractiveness level". That is, prev…

In Self-Made Man: One Woman's Year Disguised as a Man ( https://www.amazon.com/dp/0143038702/ ), one aspect of male life the author explores is wooing and dating. Her initial expectation is that, with her inside understanding of female thinking, she will have an easy time courting. But she finds that in person, many women perceive and are uncomfortable with her lack of masculinity. Relationships usually fail quickly…

It seems shockingly unethical for Norah Vincent to deceive those other women just to gather material for her book. If a real sociologist proposed to do such an experiment with human subjects I can't imagine that an Institutional Review Board would ever allow it.

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

#324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

This isn't the first time I've seen you in dating-related threads, I recognize the username since it makes me chuckle (aren't we all?). If you've given up the game, and I can certainly empathize -- it's a real crapshoot --, why do you feel the need to share such a strong opinion in these types of threads as if nobody else is having any luck in the dating world? Isn't this obviously a personal problem?

In case someone out there is in a similar situation and might be afraid to just let go. There's a lot of societal pressure built up around coupling, but the truth is that for a lot of people it really isn't worth it and the effort only makes our lives worse. I guess I'm trying to show that it's ok, they're not alone, and it isn't really a big deal.

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

#325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whites are favored on dating apps (e.g. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3244459 ) and the model proposed would make that division pretty explicit

how would it make the division explicit? Be specific. How would the pay to play messaging system benefit a rich white more than a rich black? That’s the very specific point we are discussing, and my claim is that race is irrelevant in this discussion. If you have evidence to the contrary on exactly that point then I’d like to hear it. Not some hand wavy vague generalisation on a tangential point, how would a pay to p…

I don't think a rich white would be benefited more than a rich black in terms of sending messages on an individual level. (After all - if net worth is the same then a $ is a $) However - the part where they're responded to would be favored to a rich white instead of a rich black... but I don't think that would be any different than a non-pay system. And that's not correlated to rich white vs rich black - that's correlated with white vs black. :/

However, one could start arguing that because there are more rich white people than rich black people then the system favors whites more because whites hold more money to message people. Therefore, because of that, then the people who are messaging the most desirable will more likely be white (even if split of race in the country was 50/50 white/black - whites will be messaging more because their wealth on average is higher).

I don't think such a pay to message system should exist (even though many dating apps do implement a roundabout way of doing this - lol - they all implement some throttling mechanism that you can get around if you pay $$$).

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

#326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm one of those people, but dating apps only ever made things worse. I can't imagine why anyone would want to use them unless they literally could not live with being alone. Fortunately for me I have decades of experience at that.

> I can't imagine why anyone would want to use them I'll tell you why: Why be content only meeting the subset of women I can meet face-to-face in my free time when I can complement my social life with a dating app that helps me meet more? I can do both. I can only understand your confusion if you have zero success on dating apps and assume nobody else has any success, either. And there are people obviously having suc…

> Why be content only meeting the subset of women I can meet face-to-face in my free time when I can complement my social life with a dating app that helps me meet more?

Show me the data that says meeting many more potential partners leads to happier more fulfilling relationships, because I certainly haven't seen it.

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

#327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>is give you a pool of users far larger than you'd ever encounter in a single night out If the paradox of choice is actually true (as with anything in psychology, it needs further research to be sure), then this could be a major negative instead of a major positive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice

I don't think that applies here, although maybe I'm only right about users who understand what they are doing/have the right mindset. I've lost the attribution, but someone said that "dating is a numbers game. The goal is to go on as many first dates as possible, to get in front of as many people as possible. At this, tinder (and associates) absolutely excel. There is no other way to reliably find a lot of single peo…

I think it might apply in one sense. If you're in a room and the most attractive people is a 6 or a 7 and maybe a 9 or a 10. You're more likely to have a conversation with the 6-7 range given you can tell if the other person is even interested and you have a limitation of choice, there might even be other things about the 9-10's that put you off. They seem more appealing, etc.

Go online, suddenly the pool is so large that you see dozens of 9-10's and swipe right on them, suddenly the 6-7s seem less attractive so you start swiping left when in a social setting you'd probably at least talk to them, you become more picky, and you end up getting fewer matches because the wealth of choice leads to you being pickier about physical attractiveness than you'd otherwise be IRL.

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

#328
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…

I'm not intentionally trying to be rude here, but if you are able to go on dates, Tinder is working just fine. It is a dating app after all.

If you are unable to take it a step further than the dating, it's not Tinders fault.

My wife is a dating coach, and it always amazes her (and me) how unwilling men are to learn and improve themselves. It is not working for them, yet they don't accept advice that could drastically improve their chances. Women are way different in this.

And yes, my wife and I met on Tinder ;).

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

#329
post #321

Since we're all discussing our dating app ideas, here's one I've had: Why does your interaction with the app end with the messaging thread? It feels like every app decides that once you've been "connected", that's the end of their responsibility. I'd like to see an app that takes a more holistic approach: A good algorithm gets you connected, allows you to communicate but also helps set up the first (and second? or th…

> A good algorithm gets you connected, allows you to communicate but also helps set up the first (and second? or third?) date(s).

That's like a lot of work, bro. Besides, I got a pocket full of ecstacy and a roof top rave party to spend my startup money on.

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

#330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>is give you a pool of users far larger than you'd ever encounter in a single night out If the paradox of choice is actually true (as with anything in psychology, it needs further research to be sure), then this could be a major negative instead of a major positive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice

I don't think that applies here, although maybe I'm only right about users who understand what they are doing/have the right mindset. I've lost the attribution, but someone said that "dating is a numbers game. The goal is to go on as many first dates as possible, to get in front of as many people as possible. At this, tinder (and associates) absolutely excel. There is no other way to reliably find a lot of single peo…

The critical assumption here is that the first date is a useful metric for a long term relationship. And I don't think that holds, using hiring as an analog
Post reply on HN