Are dating websites past their prime?(washingtonpost.com)
washingtonpost.com
Are dating websites past their prime?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/26/AR2010062600189.html
11 comments
> Grocery stores and other non-traditional meeting places, I personally avoided bothering women in, assuming there should be some neutral ground where a woman might wish to be left alone.
So many of the single women in my social circle complain they can never meet decent guys and would kill to be talked to be a decent, intelligent guy at the grocery store.
Worst-case scenario is a 15 second disturbance of minor flattery following by each of you carrying on with your day. Really, that's the worst case scenario. Really.
So many of the single women in my social circle complain they can never meet decent guys and would kill to be talked to be a decent, intelligent guy at the grocery store.
Worst-case scenario is a 15 second disturbance of minor flattery following by each of you carrying on with your day. Really, that's the worst case scenario. Really.
Maybe the disconnect between single men and women could be resolved by a survey that asks a random sampling of men and women when they think it would be appropriate to approach or be approached by a potential SO, and finding the discrepancies. For example, if it is found that most "decent" men think it's rude to approach a woman at location X, but most "decent" women would prefer to be approached at location X, the men could be told to change their behavior. Maybe someone can suggest this to OkCupid (if it hasn't already been done); it seems they do a lot of statistical research already.
> So many of the single women in my social circle complain they can never meet decent guys and would kill to be talked to be a decent, intelligent guy at the grocery store.
Tell them to take the initiative, then. Make eye contact, smile, and make a comment to start a conversation. Most women are far better at that than men, anyway, especially in a place like a grocery story where most of the time if a guy takes the initiative he comes off desperate.
Tell them to take the initiative, then. Make eye contact, smile, and make a comment to start a conversation. Most women are far better at that than men, anyway, especially in a place like a grocery story where most of the time if a guy takes the initiative he comes off desperate.
I am guessing you haven't approached women much? Your "worst case scenario" only applies if they actually think you are a decent guy up to their standards. Otherwise they might be offended that you even dare to talk to them (best case scenario: they just pretend they didn't see or hear you).
Not that I advise against approaching women, just saying.
Not that I advise against approaching women, just saying.
> I am guessing you haven't approached women much?
That's not really called for! The GP is right though; you're unlikely to be, say, given a slap or yelled at! This assumes, of course, your not being leery or crude and not asking them on a date straight off. etc. (where you will likely get a slap).
But there is nothing wrong with saying hi and having casual conversation with someone in the grocery store. 99 times out of 100 it will just fizzle out after a couple of seconds - one time in a hundred you might hit on a common interest and the rest, as they say, is history. I've met a number of great girlfriends in this way.
It's also a great way to get over shyness.
Also; you should talk to random people anyway. It brightens up their day and yours in a perfectly harmless way.
There is this social convention that we all must be silent and look dead ahead when queuing, for example. Everyone I know thinks it is silly but they don't want to be the first to broach the convention - just in case....
That's not really called for! The GP is right though; you're unlikely to be, say, given a slap or yelled at! This assumes, of course, your not being leery or crude and not asking them on a date straight off. etc. (where you will likely get a slap).
But there is nothing wrong with saying hi and having casual conversation with someone in the grocery store. 99 times out of 100 it will just fizzle out after a couple of seconds - one time in a hundred you might hit on a common interest and the rest, as they say, is history. I've met a number of great girlfriends in this way.
It's also a great way to get over shyness.
Also; you should talk to random people anyway. It brightens up their day and yours in a perfectly harmless way.
There is this social convention that we all must be silent and look dead ahead when queuing, for example. Everyone I know thinks it is silly but they don't want to be the first to broach the convention - just in case....
"That's not really called for"
Didn't mean it in a nasty way. And yes, actual physical attacks are unlikely as a response. Unfriendliness is rather likely, though. But if you have a hardened "shell", no problem. Or if you have become very adept at chatting.
Also, if those single girls at grocery stores are so desperate, why don't they make a move themselves?
Didn't mean it in a nasty way. And yes, actual physical attacks are unlikely as a response. Unfriendliness is rather likely, though. But if you have a hardened "shell", no problem. Or if you have become very adept at chatting.
Also, if those single girls at grocery stores are so desperate, why don't they make a move themselves?
> Unfriendliness is rather likely, though.
I'd say that is highly unlikely also. At worst you'll just get ignored :) but generally anyone will talk to you if you look and speak normal/friendly.
> Also, if those single girls at grocery stores are so desperate, why don't they make a move themselves?
Social convention. Also; this is the beginnings of a strawman because it's not like that at all :) the GP is just suggesting we talk to people more - which is always a good thing!
I'd say that is highly unlikely also. At worst you'll just get ignored :) but generally anyone will talk to you if you look and speak normal/friendly.
> Also, if those single girls at grocery stores are so desperate, why don't they make a move themselves?
Social convention. Also; this is the beginnings of a strawman because it's not like that at all :) the GP is just suggesting we talk to people more - which is always a good thing!
Your analysis excludes the fact that the sampling of people you meet is not uniform but biased according to what you do.
The chances of meeting women who do outdoor sports is extremely high if you do them yourselves, you are more likely to meet a girl like you want in a bar than in a church, etc. My point is that bumping into a girl like that randomly is actually very high, as long as you don't spend your life only at home or at work.
Great idea in theory, but what are you supposed to do in the meantime? "Online Dating Can At Least Be Practice": http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/online-dating-can-at-l...
I met my wife at the hospital while waiting for vaccinations before a trip to Africa. She was there for the same thing. How fortunate is that?
I agree completely. If you love X (and it's a social activity), keep doing X and odds are pretty good you'll eventually meet someone you like. Worked for me.
I strongly recommend okcupid.com. In my opinion it is the best dating site, especially for hackers - they even let you A/B test your photos. I'm a complete introvert/nerd and I've used their site with a lot of success. It is by far the best overall user experience out of all of the various dating sites - and it's free.
Their blog is great, too: http://blog.okcupid.com
I took the recommendation for OKCupid from a hacker friend I have in Palo Alto (I'm in Austin), and I met the woman of my dreams.
This was over a year and a half ago. We are engaged, and we close on our first house on Friday. OKCupid was great, I met my girl within the first 2 weeks, and we couldn't be happier.
I've tried numerous other sites both paid and free and didn't like the mix of those on there as much as OKCupid.
This was over a year and a half ago. We are engaged, and we close on our first house on Friday. OKCupid was great, I met my girl within the first 2 weeks, and we couldn't be happier.
I've tried numerous other sites both paid and free and didn't like the mix of those on there as much as OKCupid.
I have a date lined up from OKCupid. One word of caution, but this goes for online dating in general. It's taken me 6 months to land a first date. In real life (err I guess offline) it's easier for me to land a date than it is online. So, I suggest using online dating to augment finding dates offline in a more traditional sense. It is far easier for people to be picky online than it is offline.
I'm not trying to be harsh, but you're doing it wrong.
I'm not particularly gifted in the looks department, but I can get about 1 date a week. How? Testing and speed. Here are a few tips..this advice isn't really making any assumptions about you..it mostly is a result of mistakes I've made and have seen other guys make.
Testing:
-Photos: ask friends to help pick the best ones, take some new ones, use OKCupid's photo-testing service, etc.
-Profile: I probably went through 5 complete rewrites, followed by a lot of constant tweaking. I think the biggest mistake most guys make is being way too serious in their profile. You've really got to keep it light and playful. Sure, be authentic and show who you are, but wait until after a few dates before getting all deep. Just have fun.
-Messages: Play around with the type of message you sent. Try some serious, try some playful, try some ridiculous/absurd. You'll see what tends to work more. I'm assuming you're doing more than just saying "hey what's up," that will just get you ignored.
Speed:
Don't write long messages implying you think you two are soulmates. The worst thing you can do is get hung up on hoping this one person with a great profile will reply. Getting into this kind of pattern will make you think way too hard about what to write to them for your first message. Look for interesting profiles, write a quick message, move on. You've got to get a good volume of messages out there, don't spend too much time on a particular profile.
EDIT: Forgot to mention one more thing, take it offline as soon as possible. Don't let the messages drag on..if someone replies to me I usually ask to meet up for a drink in the 2nd message I send.
I'm not particularly gifted in the looks department, but I can get about 1 date a week. How? Testing and speed. Here are a few tips..this advice isn't really making any assumptions about you..it mostly is a result of mistakes I've made and have seen other guys make.
Testing:
-Photos: ask friends to help pick the best ones, take some new ones, use OKCupid's photo-testing service, etc.
-Profile: I probably went through 5 complete rewrites, followed by a lot of constant tweaking. I think the biggest mistake most guys make is being way too serious in their profile. You've really got to keep it light and playful. Sure, be authentic and show who you are, but wait until after a few dates before getting all deep. Just have fun.
-Messages: Play around with the type of message you sent. Try some serious, try some playful, try some ridiculous/absurd. You'll see what tends to work more. I'm assuming you're doing more than just saying "hey what's up," that will just get you ignored.
Speed:
Don't write long messages implying you think you two are soulmates. The worst thing you can do is get hung up on hoping this one person with a great profile will reply. Getting into this kind of pattern will make you think way too hard about what to write to them for your first message. Look for interesting profiles, write a quick message, move on. You've got to get a good volume of messages out there, don't spend too much time on a particular profile.
EDIT: Forgot to mention one more thing, take it offline as soon as possible. Don't let the messages drag on..if someone replies to me I usually ask to meet up for a drink in the 2nd message I send.
Or, I might just be incredibly picky. See my reply here http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1466098. I guess that brings up another point. Some people might not have found someone offline because they're just picky. So don't presume that people "lower their standards" when they date online.
I have 16 conversations dating back to May in my inbox. Let me know if that's par for the course. The problem is, of these 16, 8 were girls that initiated contact with me and that I didn't find very attractive. Of the remaining 8, I had a date lined up with 1 that fell through, and a date currently lined up with another.
EDIT: Another stat. I sent out 39 messages from May until now. Of the 39 messages, 8 got replies. So that's about 1 in 5.
I have 16 conversations dating back to May in my inbox. Let me know if that's par for the course. The problem is, of these 16, 8 were girls that initiated contact with me and that I didn't find very attractive. Of the remaining 8, I had a date lined up with 1 that fell through, and a date currently lined up with another.
EDIT: Another stat. I sent out 39 messages from May until now. Of the 39 messages, 8 got replies. So that's about 1 in 5.
That could also be true, those were mostly just some of the things I had learned. I also have a decent amount of girls initiate contact with me, but I'm rarely interested in them.
Since about May 20th I've initiated contact with about 40 girls. Sounds like the problem is you just aren't sending enough messages. 1 out of 8 is pretty close to what I'd expect if you have a good profile.
Since about May 20th I've initiated contact with about 40 girls. Sounds like the problem is you just aren't sending enough messages. 1 out of 8 is pretty close to what I'd expect if you have a good profile.
> The problem is, of these 16, 8 were girls that initiated contact with me and that I didn't find very attractive.
Do you mean that it's unattractive for a girl to initiate contact with you?
Do you mean that it's unattractive for a girl to initiate contact with you?
Not at all. The most annoying thing on OKCupid is seeing a repeat visitor that will not strike up a conversation with me until I initiate it. I actually find take-charge girls really attractive. What I meant is that I didn't find the girls who initiated contact with me so far, to be attractive. A few had very poor self esteem that I could tell just from the message they gave me. Many would say they have mutual hobbies/interests but when I probed further I realized they were lying and were the kinds of people that actually don't do much, which is also a turn off. Somewhere along the line I learned to overcome my introvert tendencies for periods of time. And I want to enjoy life with somebody who has similar interests. I go to the gym, play sports, have an active social life. I don't necessarily want somebody who is the same as me, but I also don't want somebody who's going to loaf around on the couch at home for an entire weekend. So far, girls like that seem to be initiating contact :-/
Depends on where he lives. I live in Montevideo, Uruguay, and I had to look at profiles from people in other countries to get something resembling a match (only 3 active female users in my country).
He seems to live in Toronto, so that doesn't apply though.
Edit: I actually found my current girlfriend through another dating website :) and do recommend them for introverts.
He seems to live in Toronto, so that doesn't apply though.
Edit: I actually found my current girlfriend through another dating website :) and do recommend them for introverts.
Always Be Closing
Dude, I signed up three weeks ago. And I've already gone out with three smart, hot girls. And I have several more smart, hot girls in queue for the next few weeks. I am on CLOUD NINE! Cloud 9, I tell you! OKCupid rocks. Many girls on there are smart and hot and like nerdy guys (aka us here on HN).
Right now, I'm using it to figure out what I want in a woman. I have a rough idea. But going on lots of dates with several women over a short period of time should give me a better idea. And hey, maybe one of them will turn out to be "the one." I have no expectations though. Just taking it day by day. (FYI--I'm 26/m and live in Los Angeles)
I can consult you on your OKCupid profile & messages. $100/hr =P
Right now, I'm using it to figure out what I want in a woman. I have a rough idea. But going on lots of dates with several women over a short period of time should give me a better idea. And hey, maybe one of them will turn out to be "the one." I have no expectations though. Just taking it day by day. (FYI--I'm 26/m and live in Los Angeles)
I can consult you on your OKCupid profile & messages. $100/hr =P
There's no reason it should take you 6 months to find a date online (though you are using OKCupid, which tends to attract emotionally unavailable women, IMO).
I don't want to write too much, because it's all pretty much been written.
PROFILE: be funny, but most importantly, end with a "call to action": http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/how-to-write-an-online...
FIRST MESSAGE: keep it short. It's called "the one-line hook" http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/match-messages/
CLOSING THE DATE: make very specific suggestions, pick a place in her neighborhood http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/how-to-get-a-date-onli...
I don't want to write too much, because it's all pretty much been written.
PROFILE: be funny, but most importantly, end with a "call to action": http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/how-to-write-an-online...
FIRST MESSAGE: keep it short. It's called "the one-line hook" http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/match-messages/
CLOSING THE DATE: make very specific suggestions, pick a place in her neighborhood http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/how-to-get-a-date-onli...
OKCupid [...] tends to attract emotionally unavailable women, IMO
I find this interesting. Could you please say more about it?
I find this interesting. Could you please say more about it?
Sure thing. There are many members on OKCupid who are "just there to take the quizzes." Something about the way the site is set up just makes you want to fill your profile with sarcasm and snark - both of which you'll see a lot of in OKCupid profiles. I'm drawing a parallel between sarcasm and snark and emotionally unavailability because lack of sincerity doesn't seem to me to be a healthy trait of someone you're just getting to know.
I'm just speaking from experience on this last observation. It would be interesting to scientifically break it down: how much sarcasm and "angled" emo-esque profile photos you see in OKCupid vs. Match.com.
Additionally, OKCupid is a free site. In my experience, people who pay for their online dating are more serious about actually going on dates.
I'm just speaking from experience on this last observation. It would be interesting to scientifically break it down: how much sarcasm and "angled" emo-esque profile photos you see in OKCupid vs. Match.com.
Additionally, OKCupid is a free site. In my experience, people who pay for their online dating are more serious about actually going on dates.
It's taken me 6 months to land a first date.
What do you mean by that exactly? Are you saying you've been talking to one person for 6 months before the person decided to meet you for a date? Or are you saying that you've simply been on the site for 6 months before connecting with someone for a first date?
If it's the former, you're doing it wrong.
If it's the latter, you may need to do some additional work on your profile. There's a dramatic difference in the success of good profiles versus just "ok" ones.
What do you mean by that exactly? Are you saying you've been talking to one person for 6 months before the person decided to meet you for a date? Or are you saying that you've simply been on the site for 6 months before connecting with someone for a first date?
If it's the former, you're doing it wrong.
If it's the latter, you may need to do some additional work on your profile. There's a dramatic difference in the success of good profiles versus just "ok" ones.
Or are you saying that you've simply been on the site for 6 months before connecting with someone for a first date? this.
I've been sending out a lot of messages. I get replies quite often. I had two girls setup dates with me and we had exchanged phone numbers and SMSes. But the dates never happened and I lost interest. I had one old female friend reconnect with me and we went out, but that doesn't really count. The girl I'm going on a date with tomorrow I've been talking to for less than a week. Unless G20 turns into a convenient excuse to bail on the date, it'll be my first one through OKCupid.
Girls tell me I have a good profile. It's funny and I have good photos. I had a really crappy profile at first and definitely had to revamp it. But honestly, I found that photos make the biggest difference.
I might be doing it wrong. I have pretty high standards looks wise. I know... shoot me. So often I'm doing the rejecting/ignoring of messages. I live in a big city but I also go to a gym which has a lot of really attractive girls. I would say most of the girls on OKCupid in my area are a little less physically attractive, and are no better/worse in the personality department than ones I meet through traditional offline methods.
I've been sending out a lot of messages. I get replies quite often. I had two girls setup dates with me and we had exchanged phone numbers and SMSes. But the dates never happened and I lost interest. I had one old female friend reconnect with me and we went out, but that doesn't really count. The girl I'm going on a date with tomorrow I've been talking to for less than a week. Unless G20 turns into a convenient excuse to bail on the date, it'll be my first one through OKCupid.
Girls tell me I have a good profile. It's funny and I have good photos. I had a really crappy profile at first and definitely had to revamp it. But honestly, I found that photos make the biggest difference.
I might be doing it wrong. I have pretty high standards looks wise. I know... shoot me. So often I'm doing the rejecting/ignoring of messages. I live in a big city but I also go to a gym which has a lot of really attractive girls. I would say most of the girls on OKCupid in my area are a little less physically attractive, and are no better/worse in the personality department than ones I meet through traditional offline methods.
I also used OKCupid to augment my offline dating attempts. While the offline approach landed several more dates with a wider variety of women, the online approach landed me with my current Fiance. We've been together 4 years now and are getting married early next year. YMMV, but it worked for me :)
[deleted]
Speaking as someone who just recently started using match.com (after the end of a string of long relationships), it seems to me that:
1) dating sites are the perfect example of the benefit of pseudonymity for allowing people to choose how much to reveal about themselves while still being attractive
2) dating sites rely on geographical favorability. I live in DC so as a single guy it works EXTREMELY well. But I hear it's not as great for DC women. But DC is known for having far more highly-educated single women than any other city. But would a dating site work as well in smaller communities where people marry out of high school and generally keep their social circle their whole lives? Is NYC too much of a social cauldron for dating sites to work?
3) Facebook hook-ups seem to work mostly if you are being hooked up with a friend of a friend, so the initial relationship is being built upon referral instead of semi-blind dates.
1) dating sites are the perfect example of the benefit of pseudonymity for allowing people to choose how much to reveal about themselves while still being attractive
2) dating sites rely on geographical favorability. I live in DC so as a single guy it works EXTREMELY well. But I hear it's not as great for DC women. But DC is known for having far more highly-educated single women than any other city. But would a dating site work as well in smaller communities where people marry out of high school and generally keep their social circle their whole lives? Is NYC too much of a social cauldron for dating sites to work?
3) Facebook hook-ups seem to work mostly if you are being hooked up with a friend of a friend, so the initial relationship is being built upon referral instead of semi-blind dates.
Yes,
Facebook is a terrible platform for meeting people because it impels you to reveal too much, reveal it too broadly and doesn't let you control the order in which the revelation takes place.
Dating reveals the chink in Fb's conception of the single identity. Since at least the mid 20th century, sociologists were described modern society as resting on a single-person/multiple-roles system as opposed to simpler societies resting on single-person/single-role. We've only going further in this and Internet sites eventually have to facilitate this rather than forcing a single identity on people (something that Facebook has apparently made part of it's agenda).
Facebook is a terrible platform for meeting people because it impels you to reveal too much, reveal it too broadly and doesn't let you control the order in which the revelation takes place.
Dating reveals the chink in Fb's conception of the single identity. Since at least the mid 20th century, sociologists were described modern society as resting on a single-person/multiple-roles system as opposed to simpler societies resting on single-person/single-role. We've only going further in this and Internet sites eventually have to facilitate this rather than forcing a single identity on people (something that Facebook has apparently made part of it's agenda).
I would be very wary of spending money on paid dating sites. There are just too many stories about fraud: http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts2493442.aspx (Google will find you many more)
okcupid and plentyoffish are much much better options.
And Yahoo Personals and Match.com definitely aren't the only ones. I've heard of other paid dating sites doing the same. Of course these are only rumors which is why it never gets very far in court but it's enough for me to never want to spend my money on paid sites. The incentives to move into fraud in paid dating are very very strong.
okcupid and plentyoffish are much much better options.
And Yahoo Personals and Match.com definitely aren't the only ones. I've heard of other paid dating sites doing the same. Of course these are only rumors which is why it never gets very far in court but it's enough for me to never want to spend my money on paid sites. The incentives to move into fraud in paid dating are very very strong.
Methinks the free sites doth protest too much. I've used Plentyoffish, Okcupid, and Match.com. Only Match.com was a fraud-free experience. Sure, a paywall induces a motivation for 1st-party fraud, but it drastically reduces the motivation for 3rd-party fraud. Someone who solves both will become a rich individual.
For the record, I met my beautiful girlfriend of two years on Match, so count me as biased. :)
For the record, I met my beautiful girlfriend of two years on Match, so count me as biased. :)
I've used okcupid for maybe a year and a half, and have gotten maybe two or three fraudulent messages,
I recieved a chat request from a women 30 minutes after I signed up, while I was editing my profile. She looked like a model and her profile picture was her in a bikini. It took her 5-10 minutes to respond to my IMs, which were mostly me asking her if she was a legit and "her" saying "yes, I'm real." uh huh.
Like I said, I've seen a couple fakes. They've always been really easy to spot, though, and disappear quickly.
I'm in the Boston/Cambridge/Brookline area, though. I imagine the real:fake ratio gets worse as you get into more sparsely populated areas.
I'm in the Boston/Cambridge/Brookline area, though. I imagine the real:fake ratio gets worse as you get into more sparsely populated areas.
I've had a pretty awesome experience on match.com, but I appreciate the advice.
POF is entirely financed by banner ads from paid dating sites.
Regarding Facebook hook-ups -- I get a LOT of FB friend requests from people I haven't met who usually share a few mutual friends. This is how FB is used as a dating service, from my experience.
Also, some people create profiles specifically made for dating, where they post some pictures of themselves and basic facts. Of course this is a cheap maneuver -- they want to see someone's complete profile, while the other person only gets to see a "fake" one.
Also, some people create profiles specifically made for dating, where they post some pictures of themselves and basic facts. Of course this is a cheap maneuver -- they want to see someone's complete profile, while the other person only gets to see a "fake" one.
This article asks some interesting questions, but provides few numbers. The big question isn't "are paid dating sites dying". I think the answer is clearly yes, but quite slowly.
The real question is about free sites like okcupid.com and plentyoffish.com , sadly, they have no numbers about these sites.
The real question is about free sites like okcupid.com and plentyoffish.com , sadly, they have no numbers about these sites.
It sounds contradictory, because I think dating sites are yet to reach their prime, let alone having past it already.
are you talking about the current dating sites? really?
I mean anything.. current/old.. the sites which targetted "dating" in specific were never able to succeed, unless the social networking came into picture.I see "dating" and "social network" as 2 different things. How many people actually log in onto a dating site with a hope that they will actually get a genuine date!.I think the number is pretty less. Actually speaking "social netorking" sites generate more traction in the dating world than the actual "dating" sites.
"Actually speaking "social netorking" sites generate more traction in the dating world"
I am not so sure about that. I don't really see people hooking up with friends of friends
I am not so sure about that. I don't really see people hooking up with friends of friends
tl;dr: The boring old corporate behemoths aren't growing anymore, therefore online dating is dead.
They might as well have written an article about how TV is dead because nobody buys tube TVs anymore.
Match.com is an awful, awful user experience. It's a wonder that they're still able to fleece so much money out of people.
They might as well have written an article about how TV is dead because nobody buys tube TVs anymore.
Match.com is an awful, awful user experience. It's a wonder that they're still able to fleece so much money out of people.
I really didn't know dating sites were this successful...hmm time to jump in..off to make a profile :)
The analogy with peak oil is somewhat incorrect, because new people are being born (and enter dating scene subsequently) all the time. Dating sites will not run out of people.
(As contrast, new oil is not being "made". Once it's all pumped dry, it's over.)
(As contrast, new oil is not being "made". Once it's all pumped dry, it's over.)
If you haven't read the OKCupid's blog post, "Why You Should Never Pay For Online Dating," I highly recommend doing so. If you're contemplating online dating, that is.
http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/2010/04/07/why-you-should-...
Interesting points: * "you are 12.4 times more likely to get married this year if you don't subscribe to Match.com"
* the severe male/female imbalance ("sausage fest") leads to a "desperation feedback loop" where men spam more and more women, with fewer and fewer responses.
In my opinion, with the rise in social networking platforms, dating sites are dead or dying - at least for 'mainstream' use. Even OKCupid, I think, will be pointless as people learn to leverage Facebook for dating.
http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/2010/04/07/why-you-should-...
Interesting points: * "you are 12.4 times more likely to get married this year if you don't subscribe to Match.com"
* the severe male/female imbalance ("sausage fest") leads to a "desperation feedback loop" where men spam more and more women, with fewer and fewer responses.
In my opinion, with the rise in social networking platforms, dating sites are dead or dying - at least for 'mainstream' use. Even OKCupid, I think, will be pointless as people learn to leverage Facebook for dating.
Facebook is certainly useful in facilitating dating with people you have already met irl, but I dont see it used for generating dates with people you have not already met.
Although I am curious if anybody has counter-experience on this :D
Although I am curious if anybody has counter-experience on this :D
Yeah, the social mores on FaceBook seem to frown upon random contact with lots of strangers. It's good for maintaining relationships, not so good for starting them.
I've noticed a bunch of friends either getting married or beginning serious LTRs after meeting online, though. They usually fall into two categories.
1. A set of mutual friends of them say "Hey, you two would be perfect for each other," introduce them, and then the relationship blooms through FaceBook or old-fashioned e-mail.
2. They're both participants at a "niche" online forum or social networking site, and then end up meeting in person eventually and take it from there.
I think the latter situation is way, way underreported. We pay attention to the big social sites like FaceBook and Twitter and the big dating sites like eHarmony and Match, but there's an enormous long-tail of niche sites that toss up a website and a forum and build a community. You can find a fansite for virtually every celebrity, every TV show, every sport, many of the more popular books, and even niche professional interests like startups and programming language design. Many of these grow very close, tight-knit communities, and when those communities are of mixed gender, it's very common for some dating to occur.
Heck, if HN weren't overwhelming male, I bet we'd see some Hacker News couples. There've already been a bunch of "Founder Dating" sites spun off from it.
I've noticed a bunch of friends either getting married or beginning serious LTRs after meeting online, though. They usually fall into two categories.
1. A set of mutual friends of them say "Hey, you two would be perfect for each other," introduce them, and then the relationship blooms through FaceBook or old-fashioned e-mail.
2. They're both participants at a "niche" online forum or social networking site, and then end up meeting in person eventually and take it from there.
I think the latter situation is way, way underreported. We pay attention to the big social sites like FaceBook and Twitter and the big dating sites like eHarmony and Match, but there's an enormous long-tail of niche sites that toss up a website and a forum and build a community. You can find a fansite for virtually every celebrity, every TV show, every sport, many of the more popular books, and even niche professional interests like startups and programming language design. Many of these grow very close, tight-knit communities, and when those communities are of mixed gender, it's very common for some dating to occur.
Heck, if HN weren't overwhelming male, I bet we'd see some Hacker News couples. There've already been a bunch of "Founder Dating" sites spun off from it.
How is the gender split on HN, roughly?
I have no idea, but judging from comments, it seems to be <10% female. That might be an underestimate, though, since many women who post on predominantly male forums often don't reveal their gender.
I married the girl I found on Facebook.
We met when I searched Facebook for 'Cryptonomicon', and she was the only result. (This was April 2004, so there were maybe a couple thousand people on all of Facebook.)
We moved in together a few weeks later, and got married in 2006.
We met when I searched Facebook for 'Cryptonomicon', and she was the only result. (This was April 2004, so there were maybe a couple thousand people on all of Facebook.)
We moved in together a few weeks later, and got married in 2006.
During the course of my freshman year in college (2005-2006), I received 2 or 3 completely unsolicited date requests from women via Facebook, all of which went well. Despite being single for significant portions of the remainder of my college career, I received none after that year. I've conjectured that people felt safer interacting on Facebook back when it was only open to college students.
Even OKCupid, I think, will be pointless as people learn to leverage Facebook for dating.
The swinger-ish nerdhemian folks I know who like OkCupid seem to use OkCupid as an alternative Facebook. One where they don't have to worry so much about their parents or not-so-close coworkers.
The swinger-ish nerdhemian folks I know who like OkCupid seem to use OkCupid as an alternative Facebook. One where they don't have to worry so much about their parents or not-so-close coworkers.
swinger-ish nerdhemian folks
That's the most ridiculous phrase I've seen today. It also perfectly describes me 10 years ago :-)
That's the most ridiculous phrase I've seen today. It also perfectly describes me 10 years ago :-)
Well, what else can I call a bunch of former ISP employee video game player Arduino hacking sex-industry dabbling Discordians who have open relationships and throw costume parties with each other where they have to declare certain rooms PG-13 so there's no full-frontal nudity?
They are silly folks but sometimes lots of fun.
They are silly folks but sometimes lots of fun.
> The swinger-ish nerdhemian folk
I wanted to except some category of people, but I couldn't think of how to name the group without sounding judgmental. I agree with your sentiment.
I wanted to except some category of people, but I couldn't think of how to name the group without sounding judgmental. I agree with your sentiment.
While that post is interesting and some points apply only to paid dating sites, they didn't mention how likely you are getting married though okcupid.
Yeah. I thought it was inferred that it basically sucks to be a guy on any dating site. They're actually doing their best to help, though, with photo results, analysis of what makes a 'successful' email, etc.
Facebook has the unique, unbeatable advantage of being more evenly (more, outright?) female. Now we just have to get over the 'creepy/weird/scary' nuances of meeting people through non-traditional channels.
Facebook has the unique, unbeatable advantage of being more evenly (more, outright?) female. Now we just have to get over the 'creepy/weird/scary' nuances of meeting people through non-traditional channels.
wondering why would someone ever go to a dating website, seriously, can't imagine that in my wildest dream. And do people pay for it? Seems it is a thing for the past generation. We aren't convinced.
In my opinion, dating sites are still extremely efficient ways of meeting people. I exclude eharmony, both from personal bias, and from the fact that they don't allow you to really search the database.
After you leave college, real life meetings become much more complicated. The bar scene is a lottery. How likely is it that you'll actually coincide in time and space with somebody who you would be happy with, and then how likely is it that you'll even get to talk to them if they are there when you're there? Grocery stores and other non-traditional meeting places, I personally avoided bothering women in, assuming there should be some neutral ground where a woman might wish to be left alone.
For me, I wanted college educated women who had opinions about politics and whose opinions I shared. I wanted women with no children, who lived within 50 miles of me and didn't smoke or do drugs, but who did drink socially, wanted children, had traveled the world some, and were not strongly religious. I wanted women who enjoyed outdoor sports such as scuba, skydiving, and rock climbing. I wanted women who didn't own small yap dogs.
Can you imagine bumping into women like this randomly? But with a dating site, it became so much easier.
I still went out on a lot of dates that were bad matches, but I definitely skewed my chances of finding somebody I could respect and have fun with by taking the random chance aspect out of the equation.
EDIT: The article doesn't actually disagree with this. It's saying that paid dating sites will lose out to unpaid. I was responding to the HN title which derides all dating sites.