5 ms·

I am curious if you mean the "chance of anything" as objective, or subjective number here. 0.1% means, after approaching 5000 women, only 5 (1 in 1000) decided

by watt 5y ago

I am curious if you mean the "chance of anything" as objective, or subjective number here. 0.1% means, after approaching 5000 women, only 5 (1 in 1000) decided to give you a shot. Or was the number higher? (And you are using 0.1% just as a figure of speech?) If a woman stuck with you, then they are not "way out of your league" - you are exactly in their league. So many misconceptions here. My point here, there is some subjective level setting, 0.1%, "out of my league" which may or may not be consistent with actual, hard numbers. It does not matter what you think (it's quite counter productive to overthink): what matters is how it plays out in reality. What is the actual statistic. That's what your chance was, that's what your chance is.

username90 5y ago
On tinder 0.1% is accurate for many men.
- nl 5y ago
  0.1% successful match or successful date? That seems very very low for matching success.
  - username90 5y ago
    For a match. According to this about 15% of men on tinder have 0.1% or lower match rate, and an average man have 1%: https://paulvanderlaken.com/2019/07/31/two-tinder-experiments-an-unequal-economy/ https://paulvanderlaken.com/2019/07/31/two-tinder-experiment...
    - durnygbur 5y ago
      > Tinder actually can work, but pretty much only if you are an attractive guy I did actually manage to get close to "attractive guy" for a short period, ie. the sweet spot of decent look, good photos, educated bio, catchy conversation starters, and purchasing the premium subscription. Then at around 200-300 matches and no real life encounters yet... got a nuclear irrevocable ban on the device, email address, and phone number. I'm close to saying there are really no male winners in online dating. Females notoriously compain all they get is a queue of horny sexual partners willing for short encounter, wouldn't call it a win either.
      - IQunder130 5y ago
        I am curious what would get you a "nuclear ban" like that.
        durnygbur 5y ago
        Didn't do anything more vulgar or pushy than explicitly mentioning sexual intercourse and inivitng for a meeting.
        Teever 5y ago
        That's so insane. I had a situation where a women on Tinder started asking very direct questions about my kinks and sexual proclivities within the two or three messages and while it made me feel very uncomfortable because of the way she asked the questions I never once thought that I should report her or that her kinds of communication shouldn't be allowed on an online dating platform. I'm really disappointed with the direction that match.com has taken the online dating sector. I personally prefer my online dating experience to be something like the way OKCupid was before it was acquired, that is to a platform more focused on crafting thoughtful profiles engaging in thoughtful conversations online for a while before meetingin real life. With that said it's really lame how Tinder has changed due to it becoming the face on online dating apps. I hardly used it when it first came out but it was designed and billed as a 'hookup app' and now it's full of people looking for life partners or short-term dating and people who are using the app as it was originally intended for are banned? Like I totally get the whole issue of 90% of the users being male and mercilessly creeping on the 10% of women but why isn't there room in Match.com's strategy for hookup app like Grindr or the way Tinder used to be? Why isn't there a mainstream hook-up app where it isn't taboo to be forward about sexual intent?
        nl 5y ago
        > Why isn't there a mainstream hook-up app where it isn't taboo to be forward about sexual intent? I think it's ok to be forward about sexual intent on Tinder. I think there's a big difference between "Hi - I like your pics. Are you DTF?" and some possible messages that are "explicitly mentioning sexual intercourse and iniviting for a meeting" (to quote the message you are responding to).
    - nl 5y ago
      That's not what that link says. Here's the original post it was based on: https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-guys-unless-you-are-really-hot-you-are-probably-better-off-not-wasting-your-2ddf370a6e9a https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-g... To quote that: "According to this analysis a man of average attractiveness can only expect to be liked by slightly less than 1% of females (0.87%)." (And there is a graph showing that rate extending down to 0.1%). However that is a like ratio, not a match ratio. Given the way Tinder works this isn't the same thing (Tinder is more likely to present women who have liked you).
mettamage 5y ago
0.1% for getting to know someone intimately and then deciding (together) where to go from there. I am talking 10 years back. I didn’t do online dating.
- durnygbur 5y ago
  > I am talking 10 years back. I didn’t do online dating. That's a different era. 10 years ago 10 minutes spend on OKCupid and then looking out of the window were enough to realise it doesn't make sense. Nowadays you have no choice.
- watt 5y ago
  mettamage, thanks for confirming. I suspected as much, but was much more optimistic about the chances.

by watt 5y ago

username90 5y ago

On tinder 0.1% is accurate for many men.

nl 5y ago
0.1% successful match or successful date? That seems very very low for matching success.
- username90 5y ago
  For a match. According to this about 15% of men on tinder have 0.1% or lower match rate, and an average man have 1%: https://paulvanderlaken.com/2019/07/31/two-tinder-experiments-an-unequal-economy/ https://paulvanderlaken.com/2019/07/31/two-tinder-experiment...
  - durnygbur 5y ago
    > Tinder actually can work, but pretty much only if you are an attractive guy I did actually manage to get close to "attractive guy" for a short period, ie. the sweet spot of decent look, good photos, educated bio, catchy conversation starters, and purchasing the premium subscription. Then at around 200-300 matches and no real life encounters yet... got a nuclear irrevocable ban on the device, email address, and phone number. I'm close to saying there are really no male winners in online dating. Females notoriously compain all they get is a queue of horny sexual partners willing for short encounter, wouldn't call it a win either.
    - IQunder130 5y ago
      I am curious what would get you a "nuclear ban" like that.
      - durnygbur 5y ago
        Didn't do anything more vulgar or pushy than explicitly mentioning sexual intercourse and inivitng for a meeting.
        Teever 5y ago
        That's so insane. I had a situation where a women on Tinder started asking very direct questions about my kinks and sexual proclivities within the two or three messages and while it made me feel very uncomfortable because of the way she asked the questions I never once thought that I should report her or that her kinds of communication shouldn't be allowed on an online dating platform. I'm really disappointed with the direction that match.com has taken the online dating sector. I personally prefer my online dating experience to be something like the way OKCupid was before it was acquired, that is to a platform more focused on crafting thoughtful profiles engaging in thoughtful conversations online for a while before meetingin real life. With that said it's really lame how Tinder has changed due to it becoming the face on online dating apps. I hardly used it when it first came out but it was designed and billed as a 'hookup app' and now it's full of people looking for life partners or short-term dating and people who are using the app as it was originally intended for are banned? Like I totally get the whole issue of 90% of the users being male and mercilessly creeping on the 10% of women but why isn't there room in Match.com's strategy for hookup app like Grindr or the way Tinder used to be? Why isn't there a mainstream hook-up app where it isn't taboo to be forward about sexual intent?
        nl 5y ago
        > Why isn't there a mainstream hook-up app where it isn't taboo to be forward about sexual intent? I think it's ok to be forward about sexual intent on Tinder. I think there's a big difference between "Hi - I like your pics. Are you DTF?" and some possible messages that are "explicitly mentioning sexual intercourse and iniviting for a meeting" (to quote the message you are responding to).
  - nl 5y ago
    That's not what that link says. Here's the original post it was based on: https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-guys-unless-you-are-really-hot-you-are-probably-better-off-not-wasting-your-2ddf370a6e9a https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-g... To quote that: "According to this analysis a man of average attractiveness can only expect to be liked by slightly less than 1% of females (0.87%)." (And there is a graph showing that rate extending down to 0.1%). However that is a like ratio, not a match ratio. Given the way Tinder works this isn't the same thing (Tinder is more likely to present women who have liked you).

mettamage 5y ago

0.1% for getting to know someone intimately and then deciding (together) where to go from there. I am talking 10 years back. I didn’t do online dating.

durnygbur 5y ago
> I am talking 10 years back. I didn’t do online dating. That's a different era. 10 years ago 10 minutes spend on OKCupid and then looking out of the window were enough to realise it doesn't make sense. Nowadays you have no choice.
watt 5y ago
mettamage, thanks for confirming. I suspected as much, but was much more optimistic about the chances.