We need a startup to fix online dating
41–50 of 55 posts
Re: We need a startup to fix online dating
#42But even though I received the highest response rate, I was still almost never able to get second or third replies. Once I got a response that I replied to, the exchange pretty much stopped dead in its tracks.
Women get tons of messages every day, as the article points out, and they don't bother to reply unless they're really interested. I got very few replies on dating sites when I used them, but almost every reply turned into a date. They had already made up their minds before they messaged me. Dating sites are not great and I would love to see something better, but the OP's experience suggests some failure of communication peculiar to his situation, not something from which to draw general lessons.
For what it's worth, in my experience, the women who wanted to meet me agreed after only one or two messages. They made up their minds before they messaged me. The women who wanted to chat back and forth were only there to chat; they weren't actually interested in me. Rich online interaction doesn't facilitate meeting in person. It competes with it. When it comes to efficiently deciding whether to invest time in getting to know somebody, meeting them for coffee or a drink risks less than an hour of your time and yields much more useful information much more quickly than trying to get to know someone online. Women follow the same logic men do: if they just want to chat, they chat. If they actually think you have some potential, they want to meet you ASAP so they can find out what you're like in person.
If I were trying to make money from an online dating site, I could certainly convince people of the opposite. It's so dangerous to meet someone in person before you really know them... why go out and meet one guy who's probably a dud when you could be talking with a whole bunch of cool people from the convenience of your own apartment... and when you finally meet someone in person, they should be a real person you have a relationship with, not an anonymous profile. I'd do everything I could to keep them on the site, making me money, instead of out in the world meeting people. For myself, I want exactly the opposite. I think once I've skimmed an expressive profile and seen a few pictures, I've already learned 90% of what is possible to learn online, and I want to proceed as quickly as possible to an in-person meeting where I'll learn more in twenty minutes than I'd learn in a week of chatting.
I'm not sure how a site could do better at that than Match or OkCupid, but I can't wait to find out.
Re: We need a startup to fix online dating
#43Re: We need a startup to fix online dating
#44- Why the heck do folks use a service built by people who might not have been successful in love? Would I use an operating system programmed by doctors?
- How do dating sites overcome the personality shortcomings of having a hard enough time connecting in real life, let alone the computer. In the end the relationship is in real life.
- People are nickels trying to get dimes instead of improving themselves. (Analogy can be read here: http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/blog/why-wont-anyone-be...).
- How do you set the bar of the mindset you want to attract? Should dating sites be encouraging and attracting people, "Love me to validate myself and my worth of receiving love", or "I'm happy, work at being the best I can and would be even happier with someone"?
- People who come on a site, find love, and leave might not be profitable customers. It's like the startup stuff out there, does much of it keep you in a startup phase instead of moving into more?
- In some cases, the socially challenged geeks that build it who may have underdeveloped personalities themselves trying to help others connect. geeks compensate for in person skills by being behind a keyboard. ie., what does Facebook have that isn't transactional and is transformative, say, like a successful dating match might be?
As a society, too many folks don't work on connecting to ourselves, and through that to others. Too many don't know how to be a friend to ourselves, have a healthy inner dialogue, and instead want someone else to know them and love them more than they do themselves.
Maybe dating itself is the problem. Statistically fails 99% of the time. To some it's emotional baggage collection. Some people even display their emotional baggage in the large overpriced bags they carry. Not enough time spent on developing one's self into their best self.
Maybe dating sites should be about dating yourself to find and become your best self so you can connect with others doing the same and let the love happen as soon as you learn to remove the barriers to receiving and giving love yourself.
What do you think?
Re: We need a startup to fix online dating
#45Try Grouper ( https://www.joingrouper.com ). [Full disclosure: I'm a co-founder]. The "browse-and-message" paradigm is fundamentally broken, not to mention a little dehumanizing (you're kind of shopping for people, which, let's face it, is pretty weird). Our take is that the biggest problems with online dating are both the online part and the dating part --- it's hard to gauge chemistry online and it's cumbersome (an…
I also consider the Facebook requirement obnoxious - up until I decided to give Grouper a spin, my Facebook profile was minimal, not even a profile picture. But I was curious enough that I bit the bullet and gave Facebook way, way more information about myself than I'd normally be willing.
Which, of course, makes the vapor nature of the service that much more upsetting.
My experience could very well be an aberration - that said, I figure I'd throw out a warning to others interested in trying to service but are hesitant to give Facebook more personal information.
Re: We need a startup to fix online dating
#46There's some fundamental dysfunction that needs to be addressed in online dating: - Why the heck do folks use a service built by people who might not have been successful in love? Would I use an operating system programmed by doctors? - How do dating sites overcome the personality shortcomings of having a hard enough time connecting in real life, let alone the computer. In the end the relationship is in real life. -…
Re: We need a startup to fix online dating
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
POF doesn't make it a requirement, probably because it would create friction in the signup process. eHarmony on the other hand, that's too many questions and no one is going to fill that damn thing out.
It can be done gradually: Let people sign up without filling in much to just browse. But at each and every step, show them some possible candidates that will be unavailable to them unless they fill in a bit more information. "This pretty woman? She won't let you message her unless you fill in your birth date and it matches her preferred age range. Guy over here? Cares deeply about your music taste". It's no different…
Out of all the online dating sites I've seen/used I think they are the best by far.
Re: We need a startup to fix online dating
#48An unmarried woman with a child isn't necessarily carrying "massive baggage." What a rude and borderline misogynistic sentiment.
In the dating world, yes she is. It is not fair, of course, but it is the truth. Just as short guys like me are at a disadvantage, so a women with children, people with disabilities, ugly people, people who live at home with their parents, people who are unemployed, old people (but this bias is mostly against women), people who are addicted to drugs, people who have STDs, etc. Again not fair, but the dating world is…
Single parent status is not baggage, it's a perk!
Re: We need a startup to fix online dating
#49Re: We need a startup to fix online dating
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is misogynistic, and it makes me think, maybe online dating works and that is why his experiences are negative!
I don't see how it's misogynistic. A woman on a dating site who didn't want to settle down and raise a family would probably have the exact same reaction to a single father's profile. Maybe there's a more polite way of phrasing it, but if you don't want to be raising a kid, then seeing one as "extra baggage" doesn't seem like a stretch to me. Edit: As sfall points out, he wrote "extra" and not "massive"
If you don't want to be involved in the responsibilities of raising children, make sure your filter has "no kids" set. If you can't set a filter because you are so desperate for any contact that you "cast your net wider", the problem is you.
Feature, not baggage. Unwanted feature? Filter out the undesirable profiles.