4 ms·

I find it interesting that this niche manages to survive, and that the most common takes are attacks on the gimmicks rather than the quality of the people signi

I find it interesting that this niche manages to survive, and that the most common takes are attacks on the gimmicks rather than the quality of the people signing up. The last time any dating apps were "good" was when they weren't apps, but websites. People on these sites back then weren't really trying to optimize for anything. Many were honest and had realistic expectations. It was considered a bit loserish because it's the digital version of the want ads. Of course, everyone likes piña coladas. Dating websites were the less exhausting alternative to going out drinking or finding new social circles. People understood that low risk meant low reward, but hey it was either that or no date at all. In other words, this was always a pretty bad scene. What changed is the marketing angle more poised to take advantage of the naive. Making it shiny because computers isn't really working anymore. It's crazy it ever did.

triceratops 5mo ago
> Dating websites were the less exhausting alternative to going out drinking or finding new social circles The per-event odds of finding love by going out drinking and joining new social circles are low. But the odds of making some great memories and good friends in the process are pretty high*. At least better compared to the alternative of sitting at home and swiping on an app. * There's an entire TV show based on this premise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_I_Met_Your_Mother https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_I_Met_Your_Mother
ChiperSoft 5mo ago
I continue to be furious at how Match destroyed OkCupid. OkC of the 2010s was a fantastic and rich community full of interesting people. I met my wife there. I learned about Polyamory from the message boards. Now they've ripped out everything that ever made it good, it's just another Tinderlike
BobaFloutist 5mo ago
There's also an issue in the apps, that is of course going to be an issue in real life too but will be starker in the apps, that if the apps are doing their job, any decent candidate for a relationship will spend very little time in the app. Sure, everyone is different and has different tastes, but I'm not even talking about being super attractive -- even just people that are emotionally functional, moderately skilled communicators, visually and socially unobjectionable, and modestly interesting will also leave the pool relatively quickly. This leads to two options: 1. At any given time, the apps are overwhelmingly populated by people for whom there is at least one very good reason they are currently single. If they're lucky, that reason is changeable, and they find out about it and change it, and leave the app pretty quickly thereafter. 2. The apps intentionally sandbag their "placement rate," repeatedly matching people that are capable of having good relationships with people that aren't, in order to keep a decent pool of the former in the app. Neither of those scenarios makes a dating app a particularly good place to start a relationship. On the other hand, an app designed for people looking for for one-off hookups can easily prosper indefinitely, since good candidates for one-off hookups aren't going to stop using the app the second they have a good hookup.
- sublinear 5mo ago
  Yes, but all three of those things can be true at the same time. We know the apps sandbag, everyone has some character flaws, and that hookups are often the goal. Maybe being brutally handsome and in my 30s is keeping me from understanding, but I'm saying using these apps is now far more effort than not. It's sort of like watching people try to eat healthy by changing their fast food or frozen dinner preferences. There's a fundamental misunderstanding making this way harder than it has to be. People need to learn to express themselves in a way that's both honest and attractive in order to be happy in both relationships and hookups, and these apps stunt that growth.
- hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 5mo ago
  These topics somehow always attract some really strange people (usually with dunning-kruger) who seem to think our deeply complex messy world functions exactly like a board game or that their ideas are somehow original. Go and touch grass.
  - BobaFloutist 5mo ago
    That seems unnecessarily harsh.
    - hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 5mo ago
      >1. At any given time, the apps are overwhelmingly populated by people for whom there is at least one very good reason they are currently single. If they're lucky, that reason is changeable, and they find out about it and change it, and leave the app pretty quickly thereafter. Higher quality people have higher standards, it never gets easier because you are always competing within your own dating pool. Celebrities basically date only other celebrities and still have to compete (and sometimes cheat) with other celebrities. The game is always the same, just different players. There is no variable you can change that somehow 'solves' dating. This is not a simple board game. >2. The apps intentionally sandbag their "placement rate," repeatedly matching people that are capable of having good relationships with people that aren't, in order to keep a decent pool of the former in the app. There is little to no signal that someone is "capable of having a good relationship" through a digital curated profile. Even someone who has been on the app a long time can just be unlucky or more selective. >On the other hand, an app designed for people looking for for one-off hookups can easily prosper indefinitely, since good candidates for one-off hookups aren't going to stop using the app the second they have a good hookup. This is not at all an original idea. You can also set your dating intentions to "short term" on any dating app. It makes no difference. In fact, even women only interested in this like to pretend to be prude for their self-image. It also won't change the asymmetry issue between men and women due to risks involved for women that makes them far more selective.

triceratops 5mo ago

> Dating websites were the less exhausting alternative to going out drinking or finding new social circles The per-event odds of finding love by going out drinking and joining new social circles are low. But the odds of making some great memories and good friends in the process are pretty high*. At least better compared to the alternative of sitting at home and swiping on an app. * There's an entire TV show based on this premise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_I_Met_Your_Mother https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_I_Met_Your_Mother

ChiperSoft 5mo ago

I continue to be furious at how Match destroyed OkCupid. OkC of the 2010s was a fantastic and rich community full of interesting people. I met my wife there. I learned about Polyamory from the message boards. Now they've ripped out everything that ever made it good, it's just another Tinderlike

BobaFloutist 5mo ago

There's also an issue in the apps, that is of course going to be an issue in real life too but will be starker in the apps, that if the apps are doing their job, any decent candidate for a relationship will spend very little time in the app. Sure, everyone is different and has different tastes, but I'm not even talking about being super attractive -- even just people that are emotionally functional, moderately skilled communicators, visually and socially unobjectionable, and modestly interesting will also leave the pool relatively quickly. This leads to two options: 1. At any given time, the apps are overwhelmingly populated by people for whom there is at least one very good reason they are currently single. If they're lucky, that reason is changeable, and they find out about it and change it, and leave the app pretty quickly thereafter. 2. The apps intentionally sandbag their "placement rate," repeatedly matching people that are capable of having good relationships with people that aren't, in order to keep a decent pool of the former in the app. Neither of those scenarios makes a dating app a particularly good place to start a relationship. On the other hand, an app designed for people looking for for one-off hookups can easily prosper indefinitely, since good candidates for one-off hookups aren't going to stop using the app the second they have a good hookup.

sublinear 5mo ago
Yes, but all three of those things can be true at the same time. We know the apps sandbag, everyone has some character flaws, and that hookups are often the goal. Maybe being brutally handsome and in my 30s is keeping me from understanding, but I'm saying using these apps is now far more effort than not. It's sort of like watching people try to eat healthy by changing their fast food or frozen dinner preferences. There's a fundamental misunderstanding making this way harder than it has to be. People need to learn to express themselves in a way that's both honest and attractive in order to be happy in both relationships and hookups, and these apps stunt that growth.
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 5mo ago
These topics somehow always attract some really strange people (usually with dunning-kruger) who seem to think our deeply complex messy world functions exactly like a board game or that their ideas are somehow original. Go and touch grass.
- BobaFloutist 5mo ago
  That seems unnecessarily harsh.
  - hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 5mo ago
    >1. At any given time, the apps are overwhelmingly populated by people for whom there is at least one very good reason they are currently single. If they're lucky, that reason is changeable, and they find out about it and change it, and leave the app pretty quickly thereafter. Higher quality people have higher standards, it never gets easier because you are always competing within your own dating pool. Celebrities basically date only other celebrities and still have to compete (and sometimes cheat) with other celebrities. The game is always the same, just different players. There is no variable you can change that somehow 'solves' dating. This is not a simple board game. >2. The apps intentionally sandbag their "placement rate," repeatedly matching people that are capable of having good relationships with people that aren't, in order to keep a decent pool of the former in the app. There is little to no signal that someone is "capable of having a good relationship" through a digital curated profile. Even someone who has been on the app a long time can just be unlucky or more selective. >On the other hand, an app designed for people looking for for one-off hookups can easily prosper indefinitely, since good candidates for one-off hookups aren't going to stop using the app the second they have a good hookup. This is not at all an original idea. You can also set your dating intentions to "short term" on any dating app. It makes no difference. In fact, even women only interested in this like to pretend to be prude for their self-image. It also won't change the asymmetry issue between men and women due to risks involved for women that makes them far more selective.