6 ms·

It was creepy the moment it wanted to authorize so much information from Facebook. Got creepier the moment the site asked me to start involving my friends with

It was creepy the moment it wanted to authorize so much information from Facebook. Got creepier the moment the site asked me to start involving my friends without me knowing whether or not they wanted to be involved. Got super frustrating that my ability to even see how this site worked required me to drag my friends into this mess without their consent. And from what I can see, there's no way for me to specify which genders I'm actually interested in meeting. (Yes, I know if I make profiles from my friends I can filter the people I'm looking for, but do you give me filters to let people know I'm not straight and therefore not interested in them?) If you're not straight, this type of thing is really critical. I'm not interested in messages from men and on OKC, I use the wonderful checkbox that makes it so that straight people can't even see my profile. That checkbox alone plays a big role in turning online dating from a lousy situation into a bearable one. Your writeup makes it sound like you only considered the dating patterns of straight people and your site doesn't appear to even bother to think about anything else. You appear to have mostly made a better dating site for you and people like you without realizing that dating is complicated and a bunch of people involved in a good dating ecosystem aren't going to be you, or anything like you. I'll stick with OKC. (Which, by the way, I think is mostly great.)

safrolic 14y ago
Exactly my thoughts reading the post, reeks and relents of heteronormativity and heterosexism. Using facebook for a dating site is plain wrong (what happens the day facebook opens a dating service and shuts your website access to facebook down ?) but only using facebook is definitely a tell to go away.
- SilentStump 14y ago
  I think the thought process is that if you're going to be a wing person for your friend, you're going to know if they're interested in women or men. I the same idea of whether or not you would invite a friend that's in a relationships. I think the point is very valid though.
  - djcapelis 14y ago
    I mean the whole idea relying (solely?) on friends to find me dates thing already seems pretty bizarre, but even if you put that aside, the site has a browse functionality for a reason and presumably the intention of it existing is for people to be able to browse... I mean I love my friends and when opportunities to set people up in good ways come along, I go ahead and make them happen... and I don't mind if a friend sets me up. But the whole feeling of a service where friends are setting up friends without having a dialogue about consent or you know, whether I'm even at all interested in them being involved in my dating life (god knows I have plenty of friends where I'm not interested in their suggestions) is just not really okay. And did I mention creepy? I did. But I should say it again for emphasis, because this doesn't feel like friends helping friends, it's just creepy. I think adding a social aspect to dating is a great idea, but it's something that has to be done carefully and IMO this implementation seems radically bad.
    - wtvanhest 14y ago
      It seems like a good possible solution for some people and it has a natural virility to it that shouldn't be underestimated. (Once your friends do it for you, they tell their other friends they did it for you and it should grow). I get that you are not straight and feel like services should always consider you, but less than 20%, (and by most estimates 10%) of the population is not straight. Spending 90% of your time to go after that market seems like a waste when it will be difficult enough to get the straight market. I'm sure the OP will grow in to gay/lesbian market if they have success in the straight market, you can be patient and relax until then. Just a few thoughts: But the whole feeling of a service where friends are setting up friends without having a dialogue about consent or you know, whether I'm even at all interested in them being involved in my dating life (god knows I have plenty of friends where I'm not interested in their suggestions) is just not really okay. The service doesn't put a gun to your head and make you go on the date. And did I mention creepy? I did. But I should say it again for emphasis, because this doesn't feel like friends helping friends, it's just creepy. I like when people use the word "creepy" because it doesn't actually mean anything. It is simply a description they use when they don't like something. "That girl/guy is creepy" means, they don't like them. "that social service is creepy", well you get it. I think adding a social aspect to dating is a great idea, but it's something that has to be done carefully and IMO this implementation seems radically bad. Why does it have to be done carefully? Taking a bold approach might work here, and I applaud the OP for taking it. If it is over the top, it won't work.
SilentStump 14y ago
One thing I notice on Eharmony's website is that they have a different Eharmony site for blacks, asians, latinos, homosexuals, seniors, etc.
- potatolicious 14y ago
  They don't really. It all goes into the same membership pool - the difference is only in branding and possibly some smart defaults. The unique branding for subcultures and subgroups is a conversion-increasing trick, it doesn't mean they're really running a bunch of parallel eHarmony's.
  - SilentStump 14y ago
    I kind of figured that's probably just what they did. Being none of those things, I didn't really check them out.
jmtame 14y ago
Got super frustrating that my ability to even see how this site worked required me to drag my friends into this mess without their consent. I'm going to add some explanations to the home page, I definitely agree with you here. It's a lot of trust to let someone access your Facebook, and we are not trying to abuse that trust. Your friend only finds out if someone is interested in talking to them, and if they want to delete their profile, it's easy to do. Your friend will never find out unless you enter their e-mail address. We don't contact your friends on your behalf, ever. You must allow us to do that explicitly. And from what I can see, there's no way for me to specify which genders I'm actually interested in meeting. I don't want to exclude anyone from using this service. We're so early, which is why the feedback really helps me. There are two different things you mentioned here: one is the ability to wing your friends who are not straight. This requires a better filter. I can build that. The other part is creating a profile for your friend and indicating their sexual orientation so that other people on the site can indicate interest. That's a little tricky, but that can be added. I'm going to e-mail you and see if you'd be open to helping me get this right, or if you know any friends who would be.
- djcapelis 14y ago
  Sure. I think your social thing is going to need a lot of work to feel comfortable to people though, but I'd be happy to talk about it when I have time to spare.
  - jmtame 14y ago
    Just sent an e-mail, no need to reply. I'll reach out again after we've built this.
- steveklabnik 14y ago
  > That's a little tricky Ahh, the enthusiasm of a new startup. :) Relationships are such a spectrum that this part is actually really, really hard. OKC gets it mostly correct, which is one of the reasons they're really popular with that crowd.
  - 14y ago
ahh 14y ago
So...90% of people, give or take, are straight. Online dating is a clusterfuck of failure for straight people (ask anyone who's tried it, or the OP.) Online dating mostly works for gays and lesbians (you say so, I've seen the same from others.) And this guy is an idiot for trying to cater to the straight dating market? Precisely why?
- djcapelis 14y ago
  > So...90% of people, give or take, are straight. And a lot of those straight people may one day get involved with, have been involved with or may find themselves interested in someone who isn't straight. Many of whom are bi (or queer or whatever label) and most of whom do very very much care about being on a site that doesn't just serve straight people since they're open to dating both straight and non-straight folks. So if a site is inclusive, the straight dating pool should be larger too. Even if you decide the only thing you care about is straight people. > Online dating is a clusterfuck of failure for straight people (ask anyone who's tried it, or the OP.) Funny enough, I can just ask myself, since I did use online dating to date plenty of straight people before coming to my senses. Also, I have a fair number of straight friends, a lot of them appreciate OKC a lot and use it regularly with good results. The people I hear complaining about it most often are usually people who are just angry about the fact that they can't get dates... online or offline. It turns out there's a lot of frustrated straight people out there, but there's also just a lot of straight people out there. Assuming that online dating works magically well for gay/lesbian folks but doesn't for straight people seems like a really large leap to make and also seems really untrue from what I've heard. (I've known LGBT folks who haven't found online dating to be that great and I should also note that in general offline dating can be harder for LGBT folks (especially in some parts of the world) than for straight folks and online dating looks pretty good by comparison.) > And this guy is an idiot for trying to cater to the straight dating market? Precisely why? Well first off, I never actually said that. What I did say was that the way the site felt it felt like it was designed with a pretty narrow frame of how dating worked and that narrow frame was likely going to be a problem in a bunch of ways. For me, it doesn't work at all for a bunch of reasons. For others, it'll likely be something else. Look, if he was making a conscious design choice to only care about straight people, that's a thing you could do in a defensible way and you could probably design something pretty cool. But it didn't feel like a conscious decision, it felt like a decision that was made because someone didn't think through their problem well enough to even realize the things they didn't think about. And that's the real problem.

safrolic 14y ago

Exactly my thoughts reading the post, reeks and relents of heteronormativity and heterosexism. Using facebook for a dating site is plain wrong (what happens the day facebook opens a dating service and shuts your website access to facebook down ?) but only using facebook is definitely a tell to go away.

SilentStump 14y ago
I think the thought process is that if you're going to be a wing person for your friend, you're going to know if they're interested in women or men. I the same idea of whether or not you would invite a friend that's in a relationships. I think the point is very valid though.
- djcapelis 14y ago
  I mean the whole idea relying (solely?) on friends to find me dates thing already seems pretty bizarre, but even if you put that aside, the site has a browse functionality for a reason and presumably the intention of it existing is for people to be able to browse... I mean I love my friends and when opportunities to set people up in good ways come along, I go ahead and make them happen... and I don't mind if a friend sets me up. But the whole feeling of a service where friends are setting up friends without having a dialogue about consent or you know, whether I'm even at all interested in them being involved in my dating life (god knows I have plenty of friends where I'm not interested in their suggestions) is just not really okay. And did I mention creepy? I did. But I should say it again for emphasis, because this doesn't feel like friends helping friends, it's just creepy. I think adding a social aspect to dating is a great idea, but it's something that has to be done carefully and IMO this implementation seems radically bad.
  - wtvanhest 14y ago
    It seems like a good possible solution for some people and it has a natural virility to it that shouldn't be underestimated. (Once your friends do it for you, they tell their other friends they did it for you and it should grow). I get that you are not straight and feel like services should always consider you, but less than 20%, (and by most estimates 10%) of the population is not straight. Spending 90% of your time to go after that market seems like a waste when it will be difficult enough to get the straight market. I'm sure the OP will grow in to gay/lesbian market if they have success in the straight market, you can be patient and relax until then. Just a few thoughts: But the whole feeling of a service where friends are setting up friends without having a dialogue about consent or you know, whether I'm even at all interested in them being involved in my dating life (god knows I have plenty of friends where I'm not interested in their suggestions) is just not really okay. The service doesn't put a gun to your head and make you go on the date. And did I mention creepy? I did. But I should say it again for emphasis, because this doesn't feel like friends helping friends, it's just creepy. I like when people use the word "creepy" because it doesn't actually mean anything. It is simply a description they use when they don't like something. "That girl/guy is creepy" means, they don't like them. "that social service is creepy", well you get it. I think adding a social aspect to dating is a great idea, but it's something that has to be done carefully and IMO this implementation seems radically bad. Why does it have to be done carefully? Taking a bold approach might work here, and I applaud the OP for taking it. If it is over the top, it won't work.

SilentStump 14y ago

One thing I notice on Eharmony's website is that they have a different Eharmony site for blacks, asians, latinos, homosexuals, seniors, etc.

potatolicious 14y ago
They don't really. It all goes into the same membership pool - the difference is only in branding and possibly some smart defaults. The unique branding for subcultures and subgroups is a conversion-increasing trick, it doesn't mean they're really running a bunch of parallel eHarmony's.
- SilentStump 14y ago
  I kind of figured that's probably just what they did. Being none of those things, I didn't really check them out.

jmtame 14y ago

Got super frustrating that my ability to even see how this site worked required me to drag my friends into this mess without their consent. I'm going to add some explanations to the home page, I definitely agree with you here. It's a lot of trust to let someone access your Facebook, and we are not trying to abuse that trust. Your friend only finds out if someone is interested in talking to them, and if they want to delete their profile, it's easy to do. Your friend will never find out unless you enter their e-mail address. We don't contact your friends on your behalf, ever. You must allow us to do that explicitly. And from what I can see, there's no way for me to specify which genders I'm actually interested in meeting. I don't want to exclude anyone from using this service. We're so early, which is why the feedback really helps me. There are two different things you mentioned here: one is the ability to wing your friends who are not straight. This requires a better filter. I can build that. The other part is creating a profile for your friend and indicating their sexual orientation so that other people on the site can indicate interest. That's a little tricky, but that can be added. I'm going to e-mail you and see if you'd be open to helping me get this right, or if you know any friends who would be.

djcapelis 14y ago
Sure. I think your social thing is going to need a lot of work to feel comfortable to people though, but I'd be happy to talk about it when I have time to spare.
- jmtame 14y ago
  Just sent an e-mail, no need to reply. I'll reach out again after we've built this.
steveklabnik 14y ago
> That's a little tricky Ahh, the enthusiasm of a new startup. :) Relationships are such a spectrum that this part is actually really, really hard. OKC gets it mostly correct, which is one of the reasons they're really popular with that crowd.
- 14y ago

ahh 14y ago

So...90% of people, give or take, are straight. Online dating is a clusterfuck of failure for straight people (ask anyone who's tried it, or the OP.) Online dating mostly works for gays and lesbians (you say so, I've seen the same from others.) And this guy is an idiot for trying to cater to the straight dating market? Precisely why?

djcapelis 14y ago
> So...90% of people, give or take, are straight. And a lot of those straight people may one day get involved with, have been involved with or may find themselves interested in someone who isn't straight. Many of whom are bi (or queer or whatever label) and most of whom do very very much care about being on a site that doesn't just serve straight people since they're open to dating both straight and non-straight folks. So if a site is inclusive, the straight dating pool should be larger too. Even if you decide the only thing you care about is straight people. > Online dating is a clusterfuck of failure for straight people (ask anyone who's tried it, or the OP.) Funny enough, I can just ask myself, since I did use online dating to date plenty of straight people before coming to my senses. Also, I have a fair number of straight friends, a lot of them appreciate OKC a lot and use it regularly with good results. The people I hear complaining about it most often are usually people who are just angry about the fact that they can't get dates... online or offline. It turns out there's a lot of frustrated straight people out there, but there's also just a lot of straight people out there. Assuming that online dating works magically well for gay/lesbian folks but doesn't for straight people seems like a really large leap to make and also seems really untrue from what I've heard. (I've known LGBT folks who haven't found online dating to be that great and I should also note that in general offline dating can be harder for LGBT folks (especially in some parts of the world) than for straight folks and online dating looks pretty good by comparison.) > And this guy is an idiot for trying to cater to the straight dating market? Precisely why? Well first off, I never actually said that. What I did say was that the way the site felt it felt like it was designed with a pretty narrow frame of how dating worked and that narrow frame was likely going to be a problem in a bunch of ways. For me, it doesn't work at all for a bunch of reasons. For others, it'll likely be something else. Look, if he was making a conscious design choice to only care about straight people, that's a thing you could do in a defensible way and you could probably design something pretty cool. But it didn't feel like a conscious decision, it felt like a decision that was made because someone didn't think through their problem well enough to even realize the things they didn't think about. And that's the real problem.