5 ms·

I don't know why but the online dating experience has gotten worse this year. A lot more ghosting. I don't know if that's just me. I recently removed 3/4 of my

by jokoon 4y ago

I don't know why but the online dating experience has gotten worse this year. A lot more ghosting. I don't know if that's just me. I recently removed 3/4 of my matches because they were not answering after 2 weeks. OLD works this way: * There are very few women going on those apps (ratio is about 1 woman for 3 or 5 men). It's by design. OLD apps don't care about the bad reputation of OLD. They could introduce a reputation system to force men to behave, but it's not profitable. * A woman picks one guy among her matches. She finds one and it works. She doesn't bother answering other guys for obvious reasons (she could be polite but she doesn't want to deal with the reactions of those men) * The other guys get frustrated, which is good because it incites them to pay for more matches and to land on top of the pile. Dating apps are a well-oiled scam. It's the worst social media because it preys on users by deceiving and misleading them, by using love as a medium. I have suggested to automatically remove matches if one user doesn't answer after 10 days. 90% of my matches would go away. It would change everything. Another suggestion would be to introduce a calendar feature where the dating app can automatically pick a time and safe place for a meet (a public place, usually) depending on your availability. That way, everybody feels safe, it improves the selection process, and you don't circle around in chat conversations, and you only match with people who wants to see you. It's a bit easy to accuse men of being responsible for the bad reputation of dating apps, but it degrades the women/men ratio, which is obviously the root of the problem. Women cannot properly deal with that ratio (and the whole "biology teaches that uterii are scarce" which is a nature fallacy). Dating apps solve that problem by making men pay, or by arguing that men are not attractive enough. This also puts oil on the fire of the incel narrative, but it doesn't excuse it.

carabiner 4y ago
> ratio is about 1 woman for 3 or 5 men Source? Also, even if there were 100 men and 100 women, you'd have 80 women interested in 20 most attractive men. A gender imbalance is not the issue. It's not like all men and women are equally attractive to each other.
- AmericanChopper 4y ago
  Dating sucks for unappealing men, and dating apps have made it suck for them more efficiently. That’s the primary male grievance against them, and it’s everything to do with the aggrieved, and nothing to do with the apps.
  - kranke155 4y ago
    nah youre wrong bro. There are structural issues that would would make dating apps work better for most men. You have to remember that there is a 80-20 distribution for women on how many men they find visually attractive. 20% of menive are very attractive to women, while 80% are not at all. I've seen the difference at work. And for those 80% the changes OP is suggesting would be good.
    - AmericanChopper 4y ago
      Nope, it’s still going to suck for most men. It always has, and always will. Being constantly rejected by women isn’t new, dating apps didn’t invent this, it’s been around forever. If you want to solve the problem of the typical man having matches that go nowhere, then fine, remove the matches that go nowhere, and he can have no matches instead. Also, the Pareto principle for dating apps isn’t just about physical attractiveness, it’s about all of the factors that women discriminate against combined. If you want to make an app that restricts the ability of women to discriminate effectively, then good luck getting women to use it.
      - kranke155 4y ago
        not what i said but ok. There is an app that allows you to meet people better - Hinge.
        bradlys 4y ago
        Considering this is owned by Match - it really isn’t going to be any better. It’s not in Match’s interest to have this app actually solve societal woes.
- jokoon 4y ago
  This statistic got out a few times in blog posts, but of course dating apps don't want to talk about it.
- stevekemp 4y ago
  > you'd have 80 women interested in 20 most attractive men. This is just not true people have so many interests and diverse tastes - male and female - and those outweight sheer looks, even if it were possible to get 80 women to rank 100 men I suspect you'd find that there was no "best 20" that they all agreed on. Some women like pretty boys, other women like muscular boys, some like fat men, others like nerds and geeks. It's all so variable, and awesome! Even if you did sheer looks won't matter if the man wants loud techno, and the woman wants loud rock. Some people want drugs, raves, cigarettes. Others want bondage and pain. More likely some want pop music and fancy meals, and others want yoga and vegan food. Attraction might matter if you're choosing between people with identical lifestyles and tastes. But there are so many things that are more important (smoking, or not, vegan, or carnivore, metal or pop, pop vs. jazz, drugs vs not, vanilla life vs kinky life, etc, etc.)
darkerside 4y ago
Are guys really sitting around after 3-4 days with no response thinking this might work out? Sorry for my lack of empathy, but at that point, it should be obvious she's not interested, and you should move on. You shouldn't need an app to hit you over the head with it.
CPLX 4y ago
Most of this gripe is like complaining that a job board is a scam because you haven’t gotten a job you like. It would be a scam if there were not real women there who were actually seeking dates, if the likes were fake bots or something. If they’re just choosing other candidates that doesn’t make it a scam.
- foepys 4y ago
  How can you be so sure that the popular dating platforms behave ethically? On all the most popular platforms the match algorithms are determining who you get to see. You cannot simply browse all profiles anymore and make a decision for yourself. This alone is enough to put it near scam territory. There are various paid boosters users can buy to appear over of other matches, making it more of a marketplace than a neutral matching platform. Plus, there is no incentive for platforms to match people into monogamous long-term relationships. A happy customer is a leaving customer.
- the_only_law 4y ago
  > It would be a scam if there were not real women there who were actually seeking dates, if the likes were fake bots or something. I got some bad news for you…
  - Tozen 4y ago
    LMAO!
oksurewhatever 4y ago
This is a longer trend with the way women behave online. Ghosting, zero-effort one-word conversations, setting up dates and then backing out last minute. This describes 95%+ of my online interactions with women since around 2016 or so. This is coming from someone who used to consistently get 1-2 new dates a week before eventually finding a very long term relationship with a girl who met me for a drink after I asked her out in my second message. My suspicion is that some sort of attention tipping point re: female psychology has been reached - they're so inundated by everyone that they want no one.
Tozen 4y ago
> I don't know why but the online dating experience has gotten worse this year. A lot more ghosting. I'm not sure if you are defining what ghosting is properly. It usually means to have established consistent contact (at least a few days) or to have had a live relationship with a person, who then suddenly disappears. Many dating apps are scams or scams to certain percentages or an extent. Thus they have the app send automated responses or people (often male) working for the company are sending replies to customers to keep them interested and take their money. These automated or company responses were never real women looking to date, just scamming. It should also be noted that this should include "boost" or increase response gimmicks to take more money from desperate customers (usually male). So basically whatever their male customers were paying meant nothing, so to actually get real/more responses, they must pay more. Which can be paying for a company employee, to send responses to male customers to keep them engaged with the app or site. > I recently removed 3/4 of my matches because they were not answering after 2 weeks. On average, people will usually have set up a date to meet before or by 2 weeks. Non-response can mean the person has moved on or met other people, the 2 week mark is not unusual for that to occur. If anything, you should be removing non-responsive contacts after a set period. > A lot more ghosting... Actual ghosting has always been a thing with dating apps and sites, to include "one night stands". Because of the huge ratio of men to women on apps/sites, many women can be observed quietly "abusing" apps/sites to run through large number of male customers for "stealth" sexual encounters or for "fun and games" until they think they have hit "Lotto" with a particular guy. The other "throw away males", are the ones who the women ghost on, but because they are male it is considered acceptable or at least not openly discussed. Where ghosting can become an issue, is when certain men (particularly high demand/high status/good looking males) do it to women. This can lead to various women openly complaining about it. Never mind all the men they may have rejected or ghosted on, but rather its a "crime" for it to have happened to them, and for a lucky/high status/good looking guy appearing to be having too much fun running through many women on an app or site (like the women running through guys). Such women can be so vindictive, to the extent that they will attempt or even accomplish doxing such men, or continually whine about it in public. Despite this happening much more frequently to male users, dealing with women. Many women don't even blink, when it comes to ghosting guys and jumping to the next offer, for whatever excuse. > ...introduce a calendar feature where the dating app can automatically pick a time and safe place for a meet (a public place, usually) depending on your availability. You can not force or trap women into dating a guy from an app or site, nor can you use software to remove the fear of rejection. The guy will usually have to face rejection, by asking the women out on a date. She will either accept the offer or not. What you might can do, is establish rules or a culture where if a person flakes on meeting or is abusing the site to catfish and prank others, then they can more easily get banned from the app or site. When a dating offer is accepted, it is noted by the app/site, and both parties are expected to meet. If a person can't meet, then they can reschedule and are expected to make the rescheduled date, else face a possible ban from the app/site. However, this is quite hard core, and gives a lot of authority to the app creators or site to get involved. This then can be abused by people that feel they are "owed something", and then constantly whining about it. Like if a woman meets a really rich and handsome guy who she thinks is perfect for her, except he does not feel that way about her. After their first date or sexual encounter, he decides to move on, but she decides to continually complain to the app creators or site as if they can force high status men to love her. It might be better for people to not rely so heavily on apps/dating sites, particularly to the extent of wanting or trying to force rules on others. Sometimes, just going outside and facing your fear of rejection, and actually speaking to or meeting people can be a helpful option.

by jokoon 4y ago

carabiner 4y ago

> ratio is about 1 woman for 3 or 5 men Source? Also, even if there were 100 men and 100 women, you'd have 80 women interested in 20 most attractive men. A gender imbalance is not the issue. It's not like all men and women are equally attractive to each other.

AmericanChopper 4y ago
Dating sucks for unappealing men, and dating apps have made it suck for them more efficiently. That’s the primary male grievance against them, and it’s everything to do with the aggrieved, and nothing to do with the apps.
- kranke155 4y ago
  nah youre wrong bro. There are structural issues that would would make dating apps work better for most men. You have to remember that there is a 80-20 distribution for women on how many men they find visually attractive. 20% of menive are very attractive to women, while 80% are not at all. I've seen the difference at work. And for those 80% the changes OP is suggesting would be good.
  - AmericanChopper 4y ago
    Nope, it’s still going to suck for most men. It always has, and always will. Being constantly rejected by women isn’t new, dating apps didn’t invent this, it’s been around forever. If you want to solve the problem of the typical man having matches that go nowhere, then fine, remove the matches that go nowhere, and he can have no matches instead. Also, the Pareto principle for dating apps isn’t just about physical attractiveness, it’s about all of the factors that women discriminate against combined. If you want to make an app that restricts the ability of women to discriminate effectively, then good luck getting women to use it.
    - kranke155 4y ago
      not what i said but ok. There is an app that allows you to meet people better - Hinge.
      - bradlys 4y ago
        Considering this is owned by Match - it really isn’t going to be any better. It’s not in Match’s interest to have this app actually solve societal woes.
jokoon 4y ago
This statistic got out a few times in blog posts, but of course dating apps don't want to talk about it.
stevekemp 4y ago
> you'd have 80 women interested in 20 most attractive men. This is just not true people have so many interests and diverse tastes - male and female - and those outweight sheer looks, even if it were possible to get 80 women to rank 100 men I suspect you'd find that there was no "best 20" that they all agreed on. Some women like pretty boys, other women like muscular boys, some like fat men, others like nerds and geeks. It's all so variable, and awesome! Even if you did sheer looks won't matter if the man wants loud techno, and the woman wants loud rock. Some people want drugs, raves, cigarettes. Others want bondage and pain. More likely some want pop music and fancy meals, and others want yoga and vegan food. Attraction might matter if you're choosing between people with identical lifestyles and tastes. But there are so many things that are more important (smoking, or not, vegan, or carnivore, metal or pop, pop vs. jazz, drugs vs not, vanilla life vs kinky life, etc, etc.)

darkerside 4y ago

Are guys really sitting around after 3-4 days with no response thinking this might work out? Sorry for my lack of empathy, but at that point, it should be obvious she's not interested, and you should move on. You shouldn't need an app to hit you over the head with it.

CPLX 4y ago

Most of this gripe is like complaining that a job board is a scam because you haven’t gotten a job you like. It would be a scam if there were not real women there who were actually seeking dates, if the likes were fake bots or something. If they’re just choosing other candidates that doesn’t make it a scam.

foepys 4y ago
How can you be so sure that the popular dating platforms behave ethically? On all the most popular platforms the match algorithms are determining who you get to see. You cannot simply browse all profiles anymore and make a decision for yourself. This alone is enough to put it near scam territory. There are various paid boosters users can buy to appear over of other matches, making it more of a marketplace than a neutral matching platform. Plus, there is no incentive for platforms to match people into monogamous long-term relationships. A happy customer is a leaving customer.
the_only_law 4y ago
> It would be a scam if there were not real women there who were actually seeking dates, if the likes were fake bots or something. I got some bad news for you…
- Tozen 4y ago
  LMAO!

oksurewhatever 4y ago

This is a longer trend with the way women behave online. Ghosting, zero-effort one-word conversations, setting up dates and then backing out last minute. This describes 95%+ of my online interactions with women since around 2016 or so. This is coming from someone who used to consistently get 1-2 new dates a week before eventually finding a very long term relationship with a girl who met me for a drink after I asked her out in my second message. My suspicion is that some sort of attention tipping point re: female psychology has been reached - they're so inundated by everyone that they want no one.

Tozen 4y ago

> I don't know why but the online dating experience has gotten worse this year. A lot more ghosting. I'm not sure if you are defining what ghosting is properly. It usually means to have established consistent contact (at least a few days) or to have had a live relationship with a person, who then suddenly disappears. Many dating apps are scams or scams to certain percentages or an extent. Thus they have the app send automated responses or people (often male) working for the company are sending replies to customers to keep them interested and take their money. These automated or company responses were never real women looking to date, just scamming. It should also be noted that this should include "boost" or increase response gimmicks to take more money from desperate customers (usually male). So basically whatever their male customers were paying meant nothing, so to actually get real/more responses, they must pay more. Which can be paying for a company employee, to send responses to male customers to keep them engaged with the app or site. > I recently removed 3/4 of my matches because they were not answering after 2 weeks. On average, people will usually have set up a date to meet before or by 2 weeks. Non-response can mean the person has moved on or met other people, the 2 week mark is not unusual for that to occur. If anything, you should be removing non-responsive contacts after a set period. > A lot more ghosting... Actual ghosting has always been a thing with dating apps and sites, to include "one night stands". Because of the huge ratio of men to women on apps/sites, many women can be observed quietly "abusing" apps/sites to run through large number of male customers for "stealth" sexual encounters or for "fun and games" until they think they have hit "Lotto" with a particular guy. The other "throw away males", are the ones who the women ghost on, but because they are male it is considered acceptable or at least not openly discussed. Where ghosting can become an issue, is when certain men (particularly high demand/high status/good looking males) do it to women. This can lead to various women openly complaining about it. Never mind all the men they may have rejected or ghosted on, but rather its a "crime" for it to have happened to them, and for a lucky/high status/good looking guy appearing to be having too much fun running through many women on an app or site (like the women running through guys). Such women can be so vindictive, to the extent that they will attempt or even accomplish doxing such men, or continually whine about it in public. Despite this happening much more frequently to male users, dealing with women. Many women don't even blink, when it comes to ghosting guys and jumping to the next offer, for whatever excuse. > ...introduce a calendar feature where the dating app can automatically pick a time and safe place for a meet (a public place, usually) depending on your availability. You can not force or trap women into dating a guy from an app or site, nor can you use software to remove the fear of rejection. The guy will usually have to face rejection, by asking the women out on a date. She will either accept the offer or not. What you might can do, is establish rules or a culture where if a person flakes on meeting or is abusing the site to catfish and prank others, then they can more easily get banned from the app or site. When a dating offer is accepted, it is noted by the app/site, and both parties are expected to meet. If a person can't meet, then they can reschedule and are expected to make the rescheduled date, else face a possible ban from the app/site. However, this is quite hard core, and gives a lot of authority to the app creators or site to get involved. This then can be abused by people that feel they are "owed something", and then constantly whining about it. Like if a woman meets a really rich and handsome guy who she thinks is perfect for her, except he does not feel that way about her. After their first date or sexual encounter, he decides to move on, but she decides to continually complain to the app creators or site as if they can force high status men to love her. It might be better for people to not rely so heavily on apps/dating sites, particularly to the extent of wanting or trying to force rules on others. Sometimes, just going outside and facing your fear of rejection, and actually speaking to or meeting people can be a helpful option.