5 ms·

Ask HN: Disrupting online dating - valid thoughts?

57 points by dsplittgerber 17y ago

dsplittgerber 17y ago
I am not sure if this is ok to post - I checked the guidelines but found nothing against this. If there is some kind of policy against for feedback like this, I will delete my post. This is definitely not meant to be some kind of ad, just an honest wish for feedback on my conceptual idea. I hope that's ok? I am new to HN, but Paul Graham had dating on his "ideas" list for startups he would like to fund, so I thought HN might be a good place to discuss it.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- anigbrowl 17y ago
  No, it's cool - good article in fact, although I'm not sure I see a clear path to monetization in there. After all, one could do a facebook addon called 'you'd be perfect (for each other)' and let people play matchmaker for fun. On the dating-as-sales-generator, Mrs Browl keeps telling me to set up 'forgetfulguy.com' so you can put info about your significant other and it will remind you to buy flowers and so forth. Maybe she's trying to tell me something...
- russell 17y ago
  I personally think that a blog post as an extended Ask HN is a reasonable way to go. I've considered it myself. This is a fine line. I can see self-posting as the way to spam, especially for opinion pieces. People who regularly blog shouldn't self-post. That said, I think yours falls within the spirit of Ask HN. Others considering doing so should contribute more before such a post to get a feel for what works an what doesn't.
  - ErrantX 17y ago
    > People who regularly blog shouldn't self-post. I think a better rough policy there is people who regularly blog shouldnt self-post every story :D One reason I like HN is the community doesnt seem to care much about shameless self promotion or casual self posting so long as it is interesting :D
- TrevorJ 17y ago
  Yeah, seems like a good submission. A couple thoughts: People do pay to get into a certain building to meet other single people (I'm thinking about nightclubs and bars that have cover charges here). Also, your point about people mostly meeting partners through friends is valid but the REAL question is does it happen this way becasue that's the 'best' way to meet somebody or becasue it's currently one of the biggest ways humans meet new people? In other words, does it work this way becasue this way works best, or does it work this way because it just happens to provide the most chances? That being said, your assessment of the problem is solid. It's an idea worth honing in on. The one thing you'd want to be able to hang onto from the "walled garden" sites is the fact that everyone there has expressed interest and availability for a dating relationship. This lowers the risk for those who do the asking since you are less likely to get rebuffed in the "EW, I'm dating already, thank you very much creepo!" sort of way.
  - dsplittgerber 17y ago
    Thanks for your feedback! Great point about the most efficient way to meet a partner! This is indeed a great question one should ask oneself. I see a problem with that approach though: I guess many people don't want to mix 'efficiency' with dating and human interactions and emotions too much. It's probably socially accepted to use dating sites, but are we already on our way to rethink our entire approach to dating? The expression of interest is indeed a good concept to hang on to. Which is why social networks are especially suitable for adding dating - you can add a simple "are you open to dating approaches?"-setting.
    - heed 17y ago
      Like TrevorJ said, meeting people through a circle of friends may not be the best method for landing a date, but it could help to relieve the lingering stigmas of online dating. I know many people that still frown upon and feel uneasy about digital hookups. It might be useful to investigate ways of reaching these people. Maybe like a dating site in disguise?
      - dave_au 17y ago
ErrantX 17y ago
Well, there are plenty of social dating apps on Facebook at the moment. :) so I guess the model works. Making one cross network might not work so well: I wouldnt really see it working for, say, linkedin (too business oriented), Twitter (lack of info), Myspace (too young a crowd). Facebook would probably tend to be the target for this model.
sosuke 17y ago
Take a look at Zoosk for an example of your idea in action. It may not be a one for one to what you envisioned but they are using social networking applications to add users to a central dating site and seems to work fairly well.
bored 17y ago
Don't people do this already? Search through Facebook or Myspace pages for compatible mates?
- dsplittgerber 17y ago
  Might very well be. But there might as well be a business model in simplyfying the process for them and making it a lot more efficient. What do you think?
sayrer 17y ago
"How it certainly doesn’t work is by going into a predefined building - sometimes even with an access fee - and only finding potential partners in there." Actually, certain kinds of dating work exactly like this, and translate well to the online model. It's just that most people don't want to live that way.
menloparkbum 17y ago
Your idea is pretty good. I signed up for OK Cupid a while back and repurposed the photos and certain other information from my FB profile. It would have been nice to just auto-import. I would take a look at OK Cupid, if you haven't. The other dating sites like Match or eHarmony seem very "find your future husband or wife" oriented. The other end of the scale, AdultFriendFinder or even the Onion / Nerve personals are very ghetto/spammy and seem to be best suited for ugly people into weird sex stuff, or actual prostitutes. OK Cupid has worked out very well for me in finding people who just want to go out on a few dates and have fun without the pretense of sizing me up for marriage or whether or not I'll fit into a harness in the dungeon. If there was an iPhone app for OkCupid it would be nearly perfect. (for actual "dating.")
- stcredzero 17y ago
  The tech-savvy ex-hipster geek-trash I know in Houston all love Ok Cupid. But they use it heavily for the sort of social networking that Facebook is suppoed to be for. (It's apparently better than Facebook for finding people with similar esoteric interests.) On the flip side, Facebook & Friendster started out as surreptitious dating sites. People went on there to figure out who among their friend's friends were cute enough to date.
  - dsplittgerber 17y ago
    Your last point raises an interesting question - when the current business model of social networking sites is "keeping in touch with people you know", might a future business model be: "Helping you find people you don't know but will find useful - for work, dating or sports"?
    - stcredzero 17y ago
      LinkedIn has got the first covered.
    - thecougar 17y ago
      For the dating piece, wonder if a "bounty" model might make sense. i.e. I will pay a matchmaker $1 to introduce me to a potential match (if I agree it is a good match based on some preliminary info about the person).
kingkongrevenge 17y ago
Online dating is a way to scam gullible lonely people. It works perfectly. No need for improvement.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
radu_floricica 17y ago
I always thought a good online dating site should have you _do_ stuff with somebody else. Like playing a game and chatting at the same time, or talking on a certain topic - stuff that would make initial interaction easier. I think this is more important then selecting your best partner, and then just giving you his/hers email address.
- stcredzero 17y ago
  How about structuring it like an MMO, with the ability to get points from successful dates?
- dsplittgerber 17y ago
  What's your rationale behind your proposal to force users to do stuff? Is it to make initial conversation easier? Well, could be an icebreaker, that's true. Do you think it comes across as sincere intermediation or as some kind of forced thing both parties will rebel against?
  - sfamiliar 17y ago
    think about a cocktail party. the host comes in, introduces everybody around. you meet new people, talk about stuff. generally a good host will tell you a little about the other people you haven't met, and say something like 'they'd be a good person to talk to about X', where x is some topic you know you have in common. most dating sites don't do this -- there are no introductions, no incentive to converse. you get to know/be comfortable/uncomfortable with people through interaction. a guided interaction is exactly what most online dating applications are missing.
  - TheSOB88 17y ago
    It's a way to find out what kind of person your 'opponent' is and to get to know them, as well as to have fun, thus creating an emotional bond with them - a reason to 'see' them again. A short, goofy game, akin to a Mario Party or Wario Ware video game, would be perfect for this, I think.
    - 17y ago
revicon 17y ago
... The big thing the article seems to skip over is the fact that people on an online dating site are actually LOOKING to date someone. While people on your friends of friends social network may or may not be. And approaching someone online without that context established is considered creepy, and especially so considering you're putting your 1st degree friend in the middle of it. Someone may argue that the search should be restricted to facebook ppl with "looking for guys/girls" checked in their profile, but in my experience almost noone checks those for fear of looking desperate to their other friends.
- dsplittgerber 17y ago
  Very good point - dating has so much to do with social perceptions. For a stand-alone dating site, there is a serious problem here: people might not want to contact suggested 'matches' out of fear of appearing creepy (this may be subject to local customs though, at least to a certain extent?). Tthis is why social networks are especially suitable for adding dating - you can add a simple "are you open to dating approaches?"-setting, which is hidden from view; a private setting used only for the dating functionality of the social network. Do you think that would help?
  - revicon 17y ago
    Could be wrong here, but I doubt most people would enable that setting even if they might actually be open to such a thing. In the same way people don't check the "Can we contact you for feedback on our site" checkboxes etc. Dating is a really really touchy subject when there are friends in the mix as well. That's the great thing about dating sites, they are completely removed from the rest of your social life. I work for <insert really large internet company here>, and our dating site's user namespace is completely removed from the rest of the social sphere we've developed over our other properties, because in almost all cases, users don't want anything they do regarding online dating to be mixed with what they do elsewhere (This also applies to our online job site).
    - TheSOB88 17y ago
      True, people won't check that, but there's another indicator: the relationship status. Nearly everyone keeps those up to date, especially if they actually use the site.
dusklight 17y ago
fta: "How it[real life] certainly doesn’t work is by going into a predefined building - sometimes even with an access fee - and only finding potential partners in there." Sounds like the writer has never gone clubbing before ... In other news, the writer has never used MySpace either (before it got hijacked by spammers)
iloveyouocean 17y ago
So I don't mean to spam this thread (I already posted as a response to another comment), but I do want to encourage people to check out our disruptive online dating startup: http://flowmingle.com http://flowmingle.com No profiles, no matchmaking tests. We built the site to be inherently social and group oriented. We make no claims about 'finding love' or 'finding a soulmate', our site is optimized to make introductions between like people, help them set up a meeting, and then get out of the way. Basically, we create small local groups of similar people an d then lead them through a guided introduction process that lasts a week. At the end of the week we help people connect and plan a meeting. Check us out.
marvin 17y ago
I don't think "online dating" will ever work. Sexual attraction isn't about the kind of rational things you can communicate over our current, low-bandwidth digital connections. It is well and good to describe your personality with words and pictures, but in most cases it isn't enough. It might even be counterproductive for people who are unable to look good in a photograph. The things described in the linked post (commonalities) are important parts of dating and attraction, but initial attraction is much more about the subtle things: Body language, subtle personality cues like clothing and hair style, all sorts of instant non-verbal communication, social proof etc. So either you have to remove these factors from the equation entirely (I can't really see how to do this) or you have to make an arena where they can be properly expressed. This would mean, essentially, arranging real-life encounters where everybody has a decent chance at relaxing and being themselves. The thing is, nightclubs do a pretty good job at this already. The biggest solvable problem of nightclubs is differentiation; if you go to a nightclub you invariably meet the outgoing, confident, secure club crowd. It's always a high-pressure arena. But actually, relaxing and being yourself around strangers is pretty damn difficult as it is. This is just the basic human part of the problem. But there are much deeper issues to think about. Sexuality and relationships are a very sore and difficult part of human nature, and it is never rational. There are chaotic, unmapped social issues here as well; for example a lot of women are interested in sex just for the physical thrill but have a huge social barrier against casual relationships. On the casual dating scene, this manifests itself as a series of games of playing hard-to-get, blaming alcohol for a successful one-night-stand, etc. I don't think anyone has the vaguest idea of all the other similar, irrational cultural norms that will bite you in the ass if you try to tame this problem. Online dating is difficult because +It is hard to convey your personality over an internet connection +No one is able to tell you what you're doing wrong, since the rational and quantifiable part of dating is so small +There are a lot of unmapped social and human behaviors that will fuck things up Basically, I'd just try to tackle some difficult technical field instead. Human sexuality is too chaotic and hard to quantify. However, I do like your idea of using an existing social network to bootstrap the thing. It is the best solution of the chicken/egg-problem I have heard.
- menloparkbum 17y ago
  arranging real-life encounters where everybody has a decent chance at relaxing and being themselves. The thing is, nightclubs do a pretty good job at this already I don't know where you live but I've never been to a relaxing nightclub where everyone was encouraged to be themselves. In fact, it's almost the opposite: a loud stressful environment where everyone is dressed up and trying to be someone they aren't. To meet women at a nightclub you are pretty much taking a shotgun approach. You need to have no shame and be the guy with the most cocaine. Online, you just need a decent photograph and a funny profile and the women will come to you.
steveeq1 17y ago
Yeah, funny, I was thinking of a similar principle. However, mine is slightly different. You match people using collaborative filtering techniques based on your social network profile (bayesian filtering, for example. . .). Then you via gps on your cell phone. IE, if two likely matches happen to be geographically close to each other, the cell phone tells both of you "hey, you guys would be a good match . . . would you like to hook up at a nearby coffee place?". If both say yes, the cell phone will allow you to meet at a local coffee place (or whatever). The point is is to have a weird excuse to interact briefly. Just by a brief encounter one can know if that person is his/her type.

57 points by dsplittgerber 17y ago

I am not sure if this is ok to post - I checked the guidelines but found nothing against this. If there is some kind of policy against for feedback like this, I will delete my post. This is definitely not meant to be some kind of ad, just an honest wish for feedback on my conceptual idea. I hope that's ok? I am new to HN, but Paul Graham had dating on his "ideas" list for startups he would like to fund, so I thought HN might be a good place to discuss it.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
anigbrowl 17y ago
No, it's cool - good article in fact, although I'm not sure I see a clear path to monetization in there. After all, one could do a facebook addon called 'you'd be perfect (for each other)' and let people play matchmaker for fun. On the dating-as-sales-generator, Mrs Browl keeps telling me to set up 'forgetfulguy.com' so you can put info about your significant other and it will remind you to buy flowers and so forth. Maybe she's trying to tell me something...
russell 17y ago
I personally think that a blog post as an extended Ask HN is a reasonable way to go. I've considered it myself. This is a fine line. I can see self-posting as the way to spam, especially for opinion pieces. People who regularly blog shouldn't self-post. That said, I think yours falls within the spirit of Ask HN. Others considering doing so should contribute more before such a post to get a feel for what works an what doesn't.
- ErrantX 17y ago
  > People who regularly blog shouldn't self-post. I think a better rough policy there is people who regularly blog shouldnt self-post every story :D One reason I like HN is the community doesnt seem to care much about shameless self promotion or casual self posting so long as it is interesting :D
TrevorJ 17y ago
Yeah, seems like a good submission. A couple thoughts: People do pay to get into a certain building to meet other single people (I'm thinking about nightclubs and bars that have cover charges here). Also, your point about people mostly meeting partners through friends is valid but the REAL question is does it happen this way becasue that's the 'best' way to meet somebody or becasue it's currently one of the biggest ways humans meet new people? In other words, does it work this way becasue this way works best, or does it work this way because it just happens to provide the most chances? That being said, your assessment of the problem is solid. It's an idea worth honing in on. The one thing you'd want to be able to hang onto from the "walled garden" sites is the fact that everyone there has expressed interest and availability for a dating relationship. This lowers the risk for those who do the asking since you are less likely to get rebuffed in the "EW, I'm dating already, thank you very much creepo!" sort of way.
- dsplittgerber 17y ago
  Thanks for your feedback! Great point about the most efficient way to meet a partner! This is indeed a great question one should ask oneself. I see a problem with that approach though: I guess many people don't want to mix 'efficiency' with dating and human interactions and emotions too much. It's probably socially accepted to use dating sites, but are we already on our way to rethink our entire approach to dating? The expression of interest is indeed a good concept to hang on to. Which is why social networks are especially suitable for adding dating - you can add a simple "are you open to dating approaches?"-setting.
  - heed 17y ago
    Like TrevorJ said, meeting people through a circle of friends may not be the best method for landing a date, but it could help to relieve the lingering stigmas of online dating. I know many people that still frown upon and feel uneasy about digital hookups. It might be useful to investigate ways of reaching these people. Maybe like a dating site in disguise?
    - dave_au 17y ago

ErrantX 17y ago

Well, there are plenty of social dating apps on Facebook at the moment. :) so I guess the model works. Making one cross network might not work so well: I wouldnt really see it working for, say, linkedin (too business oriented), Twitter (lack of info), Myspace (too young a crowd). Facebook would probably tend to be the target for this model.

sosuke 17y ago

Take a look at Zoosk for an example of your idea in action. It may not be a one for one to what you envisioned but they are using social networking applications to add users to a central dating site and seems to work fairly well.

bored 17y ago

Don't people do this already? Search through Facebook or Myspace pages for compatible mates?

dsplittgerber 17y ago
Might very well be. But there might as well be a business model in simplyfying the process for them and making it a lot more efficient. What do you think?

sayrer 17y ago

"How it certainly doesn’t work is by going into a predefined building - sometimes even with an access fee - and only finding potential partners in there." Actually, certain kinds of dating work exactly like this, and translate well to the online model. It's just that most people don't want to live that way.

menloparkbum 17y ago

Your idea is pretty good. I signed up for OK Cupid a while back and repurposed the photos and certain other information from my FB profile. It would have been nice to just auto-import. I would take a look at OK Cupid, if you haven't. The other dating sites like Match or eHarmony seem very "find your future husband or wife" oriented. The other end of the scale, AdultFriendFinder or even the Onion / Nerve personals are very ghetto/spammy and seem to be best suited for ugly people into weird sex stuff, or actual prostitutes. OK Cupid has worked out very well for me in finding people who just want to go out on a few dates and have fun without the pretense of sizing me up for marriage or whether or not I'll fit into a harness in the dungeon. If there was an iPhone app for OkCupid it would be nearly perfect. (for actual "dating.")

stcredzero 17y ago
The tech-savvy ex-hipster geek-trash I know in Houston all love Ok Cupid. But they use it heavily for the sort of social networking that Facebook is suppoed to be for. (It's apparently better than Facebook for finding people with similar esoteric interests.) On the flip side, Facebook & Friendster started out as surreptitious dating sites. People went on there to figure out who among their friend's friends were cute enough to date.
- dsplittgerber 17y ago
  Your last point raises an interesting question - when the current business model of social networking sites is "keeping in touch with people you know", might a future business model be: "Helping you find people you don't know but will find useful - for work, dating or sports"?
  - stcredzero 17y ago
    LinkedIn has got the first covered.
  - thecougar 17y ago
    For the dating piece, wonder if a "bounty" model might make sense. i.e. I will pay a matchmaker $1 to introduce me to a potential match (if I agree it is a good match based on some preliminary info about the person).

kingkongrevenge 17y ago

Online dating is a way to scam gullible lonely people. It works perfectly. No need for improvement.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

radu_floricica 17y ago

I always thought a good online dating site should have you _do_ stuff with somebody else. Like playing a game and chatting at the same time, or talking on a certain topic - stuff that would make initial interaction easier. I think this is more important then selecting your best partner, and then just giving you his/hers email address.

stcredzero 17y ago
How about structuring it like an MMO, with the ability to get points from successful dates?
dsplittgerber 17y ago
What's your rationale behind your proposal to force users to do stuff? Is it to make initial conversation easier? Well, could be an icebreaker, that's true. Do you think it comes across as sincere intermediation or as some kind of forced thing both parties will rebel against?
- sfamiliar 17y ago
  think about a cocktail party. the host comes in, introduces everybody around. you meet new people, talk about stuff. generally a good host will tell you a little about the other people you haven't met, and say something like 'they'd be a good person to talk to about X', where x is some topic you know you have in common. most dating sites don't do this -- there are no introductions, no incentive to converse. you get to know/be comfortable/uncomfortable with people through interaction. a guided interaction is exactly what most online dating applications are missing.
- TheSOB88 17y ago
  It's a way to find out what kind of person your 'opponent' is and to get to know them, as well as to have fun, thus creating an emotional bond with them - a reason to 'see' them again. A short, goofy game, akin to a Mario Party or Wario Ware video game, would be perfect for this, I think.
  - 17y ago

revicon 17y ago

... The big thing the article seems to skip over is the fact that people on an online dating site are actually LOOKING to date someone. While people on your friends of friends social network may or may not be. And approaching someone online without that context established is considered creepy, and especially so considering you're putting your 1st degree friend in the middle of it. Someone may argue that the search should be restricted to facebook ppl with "looking for guys/girls" checked in their profile, but in my experience almost noone checks those for fear of looking desperate to their other friends.

dsplittgerber 17y ago
Very good point - dating has so much to do with social perceptions. For a stand-alone dating site, there is a serious problem here: people might not want to contact suggested 'matches' out of fear of appearing creepy (this may be subject to local customs though, at least to a certain extent?). Tthis is why social networks are especially suitable for adding dating - you can add a simple "are you open to dating approaches?"-setting, which is hidden from view; a private setting used only for the dating functionality of the social network. Do you think that would help?
- revicon 17y ago
  Could be wrong here, but I doubt most people would enable that setting even if they might actually be open to such a thing. In the same way people don't check the "Can we contact you for feedback on our site" checkboxes etc. Dating is a really really touchy subject when there are friends in the mix as well. That's the great thing about dating sites, they are completely removed from the rest of your social life. I work for <insert really large internet company here>, and our dating site's user namespace is completely removed from the rest of the social sphere we've developed over our other properties, because in almost all cases, users don't want anything they do regarding online dating to be mixed with what they do elsewhere (This also applies to our online job site).
  - TheSOB88 17y ago
    True, people won't check that, but there's another indicator: the relationship status. Nearly everyone keeps those up to date, especially if they actually use the site.

dusklight 17y ago

fta: "How it[real life] certainly doesn’t work is by going into a predefined building - sometimes even with an access fee - and only finding potential partners in there." Sounds like the writer has never gone clubbing before ... In other news, the writer has never used MySpace either (before it got hijacked by spammers)

iloveyouocean 17y ago

So I don't mean to spam this thread (I already posted as a response to another comment), but I do want to encourage people to check out our disruptive online dating startup: http://flowmingle.com http://flowmingle.com No profiles, no matchmaking tests. We built the site to be inherently social and group oriented. We make no claims about 'finding love' or 'finding a soulmate', our site is optimized to make introductions between like people, help them set up a meeting, and then get out of the way. Basically, we create small local groups of similar people an d then lead them through a guided introduction process that lasts a week. At the end of the week we help people connect and plan a meeting. Check us out.

marvin 17y ago

I don't think "online dating" will ever work. Sexual attraction isn't about the kind of rational things you can communicate over our current, low-bandwidth digital connections. It is well and good to describe your personality with words and pictures, but in most cases it isn't enough. It might even be counterproductive for people who are unable to look good in a photograph. The things described in the linked post (commonalities) are important parts of dating and attraction, but initial attraction is much more about the subtle things: Body language, subtle personality cues like clothing and hair style, all sorts of instant non-verbal communication, social proof etc. So either you have to remove these factors from the equation entirely (I can't really see how to do this) or you have to make an arena where they can be properly expressed. This would mean, essentially, arranging real-life encounters where everybody has a decent chance at relaxing and being themselves. The thing is, nightclubs do a pretty good job at this already. The biggest solvable problem of nightclubs is differentiation; if you go to a nightclub you invariably meet the outgoing, confident, secure club crowd. It's always a high-pressure arena. But actually, relaxing and being yourself around strangers is pretty damn difficult as it is. This is just the basic human part of the problem. But there are much deeper issues to think about. Sexuality and relationships are a very sore and difficult part of human nature, and it is never rational. There are chaotic, unmapped social issues here as well; for example a lot of women are interested in sex just for the physical thrill but have a huge social barrier against casual relationships. On the casual dating scene, this manifests itself as a series of games of playing hard-to-get, blaming alcohol for a successful one-night-stand, etc. I don't think anyone has the vaguest idea of all the other similar, irrational cultural norms that will bite you in the ass if you try to tame this problem. Online dating is difficult because +It is hard to convey your personality over an internet connection +No one is able to tell you what you're doing wrong, since the rational and quantifiable part of dating is so small +There are a lot of unmapped social and human behaviors that will fuck things up Basically, I'd just try to tackle some difficult technical field instead. Human sexuality is too chaotic and hard to quantify. However, I do like your idea of using an existing social network to bootstrap the thing. It is the best solution of the chicken/egg-problem I have heard.

menloparkbum 17y ago
arranging real-life encounters where everybody has a decent chance at relaxing and being themselves. The thing is, nightclubs do a pretty good job at this already I don't know where you live but I've never been to a relaxing nightclub where everyone was encouraged to be themselves. In fact, it's almost the opposite: a loud stressful environment where everyone is dressed up and trying to be someone they aren't. To meet women at a nightclub you are pretty much taking a shotgun approach. You need to have no shame and be the guy with the most cocaine. Online, you just need a decent photograph and a funny profile and the women will come to you.

steveeq1 17y ago

Yeah, funny, I was thinking of a similar principle. However, mine is slightly different. You match people using collaborative filtering techniques based on your social network profile (bayesian filtering, for example. . .). Then you via gps on your cell phone. IE, if two likely matches happen to be geographically close to each other, the cell phone tells both of you "hey, you guys would be a good match . . . would you like to hook up at a nearby coffee place?". If both say yes, the cell phone will allow you to meet at a local coffee place (or whatever). The point is is to have a weird excuse to interact briefly. Just by a brief encounter one can know if that person is his/her type.