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

Post by ZoomZoomZoom » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 9:52 PM UTC

derialstrazus wrote: post #50

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…

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…

Post by ZoomZoomZoom » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 9:57 PM UTC

mgamache wrote: post #181

LudwigNagasena wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Desperate ugly men will crowd out handsome guys who can get laid on Tinder without paying for anything, and you will basically have a service for finding a sugar daddy.

Women still have absolute standards so, no matter how much the desperate ugly guy pays, his odds of success are still low, so the optimal strategy would still be to date around your level, right? Also, maybe the messaging cost goes down for men with high response rates (proving they are attractive).

Post by jfengel » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 10:15 PM UTC

newnewpdro wrote: post #355

jfengel wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between good attention and bad attention. Likes are cheap; they literally cost nothing. So are message that say "hi", with no indication that they've even read your profile. Logging into a dating app and discovering thousands of people -- all of whom seem to know only that you're female and therefore approve -- is as soul-sucking as getting no attention at all. I was very popular on online dating…

> Ask your sister what fraction of those stacked-up notifications consisted solely of the word "hi". We ended up discussing her dating experience at length at the time. Honestly it was plain ridiculous. Sure, many of the OKC messages were short "hi" or other thoughtless one-liners. But the content didn't matter, she treated them all as signals for a live one which drew her to their profiles where she would then hold…

Post by StacyRoberts » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 10:28 PM UTC

SkyBelow wrote: post #276

crazygringo wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but they're not extremely broken. I worked at OkCupid 8 years ago, saw the issues they faced then and have seen the evolution of the apps since then, and right now they really are as good as anyone's been able to come up with that attracts enough active users to generate promising dates. If there were a drastically better solution, then it would take over the market. The last major innovation was when Tinder i…

>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

Post by solotronics » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 11:17 PM UTC

HBKXNCUO wrote: post #296

LorenPechtel wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the idea (not that I'm in the dating market) but I think any purchase option is going to end up matching wealthy men with attractive women. Instead, how about a different approach: You get say 10 stamps/day. There is no way to purchase them. Any message you receive can be replied to once with no cost. Also, the cost to send to someone is adjusted by the cost to send to you. (Another poster suggested ELO rating…

>but I think any purchase option is going to end up matching wealthy men with attractive women. Isn't that how it normally works out anyway?