I'm still not sure why this article is equating preference with racism. If I'm attracted to white women and I'm white, it has nothing to do with racism.
If you read the article you'd have seen that it does indeed question that very equation.
OkCupid’s Unblushing Analyst of Attraction
61–70 of 89 posts
Re: OkCupid’s Unblushing Analyst of Attraction
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
OKTrends went dormant when OKCupid was sold to the company that operates match.com. I don't know what Rudder's involvement with OKCupid was after that, but he was no longer one of the owners. He might have still worked there, but kept his blog silent under pressure from management.
I used to work at OkCupid, on OkTrends. You're not the first person to propose this question - there's a comment like this almost every time OkCupid makes the front page - and here's what I wrote the last time[0], which I think explains it well: There were a number of factors. A bit part is that, in 2010, there were 2.5 people working full-time[1] on doing research for OkTrends, which allowed us to research, write, a…
Christian had time to write a book, but did not have time to update the blog.
I would suggest that in the interests of the OKCupid business, updating the blog would have been a better thing to do than write a book. The blog drew many users to OK Cupid. It's possible that writing a book was in Christian's interest.
If Christian was no longer working at OK Cupid while he wrote the book, then I understand. In that case the error is on the part of the New York Times for describing him as currently in that role.
Re: OkCupid’s Unblushing Analyst of Attraction
#63I'm always confused by the phrase "African-American." OkCupid is international. Why does somebody with African ethnicity have to be classified as "African-American"?
I was talking to a co-worker about another co-worker, commending his work, and she said "Oh, the African American guy?"
Oh man, I lost it. I laughed so hard and she just didn't get it.
We're not American... Neither was he...
Re: OkCupid’s Unblushing Analyst of Attraction
#64Re: OkCupid’s Unblushing Analyst of Attraction
#65This is really annoying (emphasis mine):
>Mr. Rudder is particularly interested in the divide between the mates people claim they want and their actual online pursuits. Witness the actions of 35-year-old heterosexual men on OkCupid. These men typically search for women between the ages of 24 and 40, Mr. Rudder reports, yet in practice they rarely contact anyone over 29.
>“I see this as a statement of what men imagine they’re supposed to desire,” he writes in the book, “versus what they actually do.”
For a guy talking up all the awesome science he thinks he can do, this is rather unscientific. I'm sure he realizes there are other explanations for this trend (older women are more likely to be divorced or have kids, for example), but by promoting his own narrative he muddies the waters. For what it's worth I don't think his interpretation of the data is correct in this case.
A lot of other stuff on the OKCupid blog, e.g. claims of racism because black women receive fewer first messages than women of other races, fell into the same trap. The blog was very interesting to read, to be sure, but I couldn't take it seriously because there was so much pseudoscience and just-so stories, even if it was backed up with mountains of data and nifty charts.
Re: OkCupid’s Unblushing Analyst of Attraction
#66I'm still not sure why this article is equating preference with racism. If I'm attracted to white women and I'm white, it has nothing to do with racism.
Individual preference (it seems to me) isn't racist, but in aggregate it at the very least raises questions about where those widespread preferences come from.
> Individual preference (it seems to me) isn't racist, but in aggregate it at the very least raises questions about where those widespread preferences come from.
Thank you. It's so easy to brush under the rug peoples racial preferences as if they are sacrosanct
Re: OkCupid’s Unblushing Analyst of Attraction
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
OKTrends went dormant when OKCupid was sold to the company that operates match.com. I don't know what Rudder's involvement with OKCupid was after that, but he was no longer one of the owners. He might have still worked there, but kept his blog silent under pressure from management.
I used to work at OkCupid, on OkTrends. You're not the first person to propose this question - there's a comment like this almost every time OkCupid makes the front page - and here's what I wrote the last time[0], which I think explains it well: There were a number of factors. A bit part is that, in 2010, there were 2.5 people working full-time[1] on doing research for OkTrends, which allowed us to research, write, a…
Also to be fair, a large reason for OkTrends was PR. I'm pretty sure we stopped paying for a PR agency around the same time OkTrends started since money was better spent on widely read blog posts than getting Sam on early morning talk shows.
After getting acquired I think the general need for that type of PR was less (in addition to the manpower issues you mentioned).
Re: OkCupid’s Unblushing Analyst of Attraction
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
so in other words... i'm right, you're a white guy.
No, I was just trying to point out how racist you sound. Saying things like "my white friends"? Seriously? I now just realized that you are a very stereotyping person and exactly the kind of person that makes these okCupid releases dangerous. Yikes.
Ooh. The guy has "white friends". He must be such a bad person.
/sigh
Re: OkCupid’s Unblushing Analyst of Attraction
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
OKC staff have publicly, repeatedly, that the reason the article was taken down was that after their acquisition by Match, the OK Trends staff had access to new data which showed that their original conclusion was wrong. Example of such an explanation: http://www.reddit.com/r/OkCupid/comments/pr2wo/dyk_that_okcu...
Well, I'm afraid I didn't see that Reddit discussion from 2 years ago, but quoting from it: > Basically the breakdown was that rather than 93%+ of the people you are shown being "dead profiles" the actual number is more like 10-20%. > But if you take these into consideration, our conclusion would say, "Match.com users get married at about the same rate or higher as people not using Match.com!" That's not really a rin…
> That's not really a ringing endorsement here, at best it shows that if we change our estimates a little we can reverse our conclusions. That to me says that they were never able to come to very reliable conclusions in the first place on this issue.
And if you read the entire comment thread, you'll see that they removed the article precisely because they were unable to come to any real conclusions.
The original blog post stated that paid dating sites made one's odds worse. Real numbers demonstrated that paid sites were, at worst, a wash.
Re: OkCupid’s Unblushing Analyst of Attraction
#70I have a lot of respect for the people behind OkCupid. They tread a lot of grey areas that many online entities are scared to. On the whole, I also think usage of willfully submitted and gathered user data for things other than advertising is amazing. Too many companies have invested too many resources into data analytics purely for increasing revenue from advertising. I think if companies can find ways to gain bette…
> I have a lot of respect for the people behind OkCupid. Those people being match.com - the same people that operate the 'tinder' app. Much like how the company that sells the eco-friendly smoothies is probably Coca Cola. Ultimately match.com want to own online dating. Since there is always going to be a niche for free dating sites (as well as the subscription model), they have to have the best 'free'/freemium dating…
I see what you're saying. Sure, by some definitions the people behind match.com are behind OkCupid, but I'm pretty sure they're quite hands-off from okc's operations and general demeanor. Of course, they are probably involved in their profit strategies as you say, and that's hard to avoid.
I still have respect for whoever came up with the eco-friendly smoothies and was able to pose enough of a threat to Coca Cola, but instead of getting crushed by them is able to harness the giant's resources to make more eco-friendly smoothies. It's a lot better than folding under the evil.
There are no saints at the helm of any for-profit organizations, or they'd get destroyed. I'm talking within that (very realistic and tolerable) space, they do some creative things [as a past okcupid user and as someone interested in their data] that provide interesting value to the customer that are hard to find elsewhere.