61–70 of 111 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>a center-right think tank Well-poisoning[0]. If there are flaws with the surveys, criticize that. 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well
he provided a fact, which is an observation of reality. you provided a judgment, which is a projection of the judge.
The results of the survey this article is based on seems to be nonsense. The numbers for women and men in each category should more or less match, unless there were a huge difference in same-sex or one-to-many relationsships or in the absolute numbers of male vs female, which seems implausible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you buy a car, what is your first filter to narrow the market? What is a pretty car? Or, do I need an SUV, truck or car? Do you want ICE or EV or Hybrid? Or do you start by picking all the red cars that you think are pretty and then find one that suits your needs? Sorry for comparing dating to buying a car.
> When you buy a car, what is your first filter to narrow the market? Price
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a counter point, having gone on 100s of dates and met 10s of thousands of people in real life, in my experience people that mention open mindedness as a desirable attribute tend to mean it, at least as it relates to those who do not mention it.
Correct me if I'm wrong but pretty much everybody will list the very same desirable traits like open mindedness, humor... and you can go on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a counter point, having gone on 100s of dates and met 10s of thousands of people in real life, in my experience people that mention open mindedness as a desirable attribute tend to mean it, at least as it relates to those who do not mention it.
Sure, the subset of people mentioning any trait is more likely to want that trait than the subset who doesn't mention it. But that doesn't mean the individual is accurately self evaluating what they want, especially when it comes to intangible things like open-mindedness. I assume preferenced on physical/tangible traits are more consistent between stated preference and reality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're not less important, they're table stakes. Is there wiggle room, sure. Maybe sometimes people are capable of being a little more flexible on these things than they realize. But for example, I think this is true of just about everyone: there's an age range that they're willing to date within, and outside of that range, everyone is a hard pass. I wouldn't date someone who was twice my age, no matter how great th…
What I don’t hear you acknowledging is that partners without relationships skills are significantly less likely to last — or for that matter, that you even value relationships skills. If you don’t, that’s fine, but you to me are both missing my core point and also in my opinion much less likely to actually end up in a meaningful relationship.
This is a forum for hackers and entrepreneurs. You are an entrepreneur who has run a string of dating startups. I am informing you about the preferences which exist in this market. You believe these preferences to be wrong. I think there may be business advantage for you in recognizing that those preferences are real and not wrong.
Is it because Republicans generally value family values and staying in stable relationships more?
Also another interesting thing is Gen Z relying on Friendships rather than online dating to find their partners. I think we have a generation fed up with algorithms and how shallow online partner selection can be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not wrong that dating platforms are like that (Tinder, I think being the most obvious) -- and you seem to have direct experience with this -- but suggesting that people start platonically is very ... Sunday church style. I guess everyone is different, but for me relationships that start out platonically...end up platonic. If nothing happens in the first 3-5 dates...nothing ever will really. I realize that's pa…
Actually, I don’t agree with the whole date friends of friends or joining an existing social group is a good approach, or at the very least, it has pros and cons. When dating from a pool of like that, people tend to act significantly different and if short term relationship fails to become long term relationship, it generally has a negative impact on one of the individuals and/or group.
You need to date kind of "anonymously" (to avoid exactly what you are talking about), but with people that have similar interests. So in short form I'm talking about meeting up with people of similar hobbies or interests (rock climbing, board gaming, going to raves, whatever)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Neither Couch Surfer, nor Meetup are designed for dating — and in my experience anyone using them for dating has a negative impact on there intended use. In the case of Meetup, there are dating groups, but in my experience those are a waste of time.
I remember someone writing an article about becoming a couchsurfing host to have one-night stands. By the end of the first summer the dude - learned how to reliably tell if his guest was willing to sleep with her hosts before inviting her - came up with a rehearsed tour of the city, complete with a spontaneous romantic lunch in a hidden gem of a cafe (with a reliable poker-face waiter) - ironed out the kinks in the "…
Honestly, I don’t think a lot of users understand how potentially dangerous some online services are or for that matter, how to manage or recognize risks; not to mention platforms generally hide their risks, since it impacts user engagement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, I don’t agree with the whole date friends of friends or joining an existing social group is a good approach, or at the very least, it has pros and cons. When dating from a pool of like that, people tend to act significantly different and if short term relationship fails to become long term relationship, it generally has a negative impact on one of the individuals and/or group.
I agree with you, but read what I said again and understand I'm not suggesting dating friends of friends or known social circles. You need to date kind of "anonymously" (to avoid exactly what you are talking about), but with people that have similar interests. So in short form I'm talking about meeting up with people of similar hobbies or interests (rock climbing, board gaming, going to raves, whatever)
Also, I agree, the whole love at first sight is for sure a very real pattern, and uncommon for friendships to develop into something more. That said, in truly long term relationships, vast majority of those types of feelings significantly fade after the “honeymoon” phase of a relationship. Further, if someone is with you for example financial reasons, it’s much less likely they’ll stick around if financial hardships are experienced or they find someone else with significantly more financial resources.
My thesis is not so much to grow friendships into non-platonic relationships, but that relationship attributes are predictable among platonic and non-platonic relationships and that by requiring someone build a “relationship reputation” first, then when engaging other users in the context of going on a date, there’s a much higher chance that they’ll actually have relationships skills.
Whole shared interests aspect is also a frequently sighted as a desirable aspect of a relationship, though rarely good predictor of relationships skills.