Match.com Used Fake Ads to Swindle Users, F.T.C. Says

Post by gruturo » Thu, Sep 26, 2019, 4:22 PM UTC

freeAgent wrote: post #438

gruturo wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

English is not my first language, but yes, to my knowledge that is grammatically correct. Maybe it is a bit ambiguous, although from the context it should be reasonably clear that I was with my (now-ex) girlfriend for that period of time, and not with OkC itself :)

Most English speakers would say, "a woman who I was with for 3 years." In this case "with" is understood to mean in a romantic relationship. I don't think what you said is technically correct. "With whom I was" calls for something (a verb or phrase) to be tacked onto the end, but it would still be awkward. For example, "with whom I was dating for three years."

Post by blaser-waffle » Thu, Sep 26, 2019, 4:41 PM UTC

derefr wrote: post #375

mcv wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the most effective way to stand out is for women to contact men. With men spamming all women with meaningless messages, there's little point for women to respond to men contacting them. But if a man received a message from a woman, it's more likely they're real and not a fake profile, and that they're actually interested. But dating sites that create fake profiles and use all these dark patterns to try to con…

One simple technique a dating website could use to “disrupt” this market, without doing the only-women-can-contact thing, would be just to disallow men (or anyone) from sending messages with the same content as any message that person has sent previously.

Post by megous » Thu, Sep 26, 2019, 4:44 PM UTC

notyourday wrote: post #426

megous wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Think of it as her being a customer and you being a sales person at Best Buy." Well that's the wrong approach right there. I'm glad to serve the needs of the other person, but I'll not approach someone with this mindset at the beginning (like sales people have to do). My approach at the beginning is that of exploration, and careless fun. I certainly don't want to start a relationship in a subservient role. Anyway, h…

> Well that's the wrong approach right there. I'm glad to serve the needs of the other person, but I'll not approach someone with this mindset at the beginning (like sales people have to do). And how is it working for you? Because this seems to be the approach advocated and practiced by the "nice guys" who complain that they can't get a date. > You walk up to someone, start opening your mouth for a word, and they swi…

Post by ClumsyPilot » Thu, Sep 26, 2019, 4:48 PM UTC

kilroy123 wrote: post #212

arkh wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd say it's about 80% male. It's more like most women will go for 20% of the men. If you're part of the 80% you'll feel alone. As an experiment just make a fake profile with some model's picture to discover how many women are around.

This is correct. It’s become a winner takes all situation.

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 26, 2019, 4:50 PM UTC

gruturo wrote: post #239

LeonM wrote: post #203

I've tried a number of dating websites in the past year, and all of them are like this. First and foremost: No matter how hard they try to hide it, the male/female balance on all straight dating sites is completely off. I'd say it's about 80% male. So most of them fill with fake accounts to get the balance backs. The matching algorithms don't really exist, they are extremely primitive and usually optimised for engage…

For-profit dating sites also share a common problem: they need to extract revenue out of you, but the more successful they are at being dating sites, the sooner they lose you as a customer. All the problems we discuss are pretty much related to this point: They probably have good matching algorithms, but they only showed you actual good matches you'd be gone from the site (taking the other person with you). So they h…