Why Nobody Wants You On OKCupid 473
Hugh Pickens writes "Social awkwardness has the most opportunity to shine in your very first message to a potential sweetheart, write Andrea Bartz and Brenna Ehrlich at CNN. Bartz and Ehrlich enumerate and humorously describe seven types of message senders: the generalizer, the autobiographer, the 'eccentric,' the creeper, the gusher, and the wordless wonder. Our favorite: the generalizer, whose typical first message may be 'hey, wuts up?' Why does no one want the generalizer? 'You're probably stupid. Or possibly illiterate,' write Bartz and Ehrilich. According to OKTrends, bad grammar and bad spelling are huge turn-offs in a first message. 'Our negative correlation list is a fool's lexicon: ur, u, wat, wont, and so on. These all make a terrible first impression. In fact, if you count hit (and we do!) the worst 6 words you can use in a first message are all stupid slang.' Other tips from OKTrends' analysis of successful keywords and phrases from over 500,000 first contacts on OKCupid: Avoid physical compliments, bring up specific interests, and if you're a guy, be self-effacing."
if you're a guy, be self-effacing (Score:2)
"if you're a guy, be self-effacing." Like we didn't already know that women want men who believe they're greater than we are. Maybe I like women who aren't threatened by my knowing what I want...
Re:if you're a guy, be self-effacing (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Dating isn't everything (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree. However, as a divorced man, I find there are aspects of male-female relations that I miss profoundly. I miss the intimacy of having a woman as my best friend. It isn't just about sex. Sex is easy to get, but it's hollow when it's just about servicing a biological need. It's like having a nice steak dinner. Sure, it was good, but it only lasted for that time it took to consume. Making love with a woman you love is beyond the steak dinner... Far, far beyond it.
That said, I hate dating. I'd rather get to know someone organically, and if we find we like each other's company, then date. Online dating to me has been an utterly shallow misadventure.
I totally expect to be alone for a while, and I'm okay with that. I have done exactly what you describe since my divorce, and find I enjoy my life thoroughly. But it would be nice to find someone I can share it with.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow, coming out of a relationship of 5 years here and I know exactly what you mean. I've been surprised to find just how happy I can be just hanging out with myself, doing whatever I like, whenever I like. That said, I do miss the companionship from time to time. But not enough to engage in a bunch of shallow bullshit dating. I'll wait until I find someone who stimulates my mind enough to be attractive before I try dating again.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I like women who aren't threatened by my knowing what I want...
It is exactly this attitude that the fine article addresses. By demanding that the woman concede to that huge demand (don't be threatened by $something) right at the first message, you are automatically pushing away a large portion of women many of which may be able to concede to that demand later.
The aggressive, self-confident girl of XKCD is _not_ looking for love online.
Re: (Score:2)
The aggressive, self-confident girl of XKCD is _not_ looking for love online.
Well, I'm in a happy relationship now, so neither am I. And if I were, I wouldn't be looking on a dating site. I'd just be blogging and chatting more. It always worked for me in the past...
Re: (Score:3)
The aggressive, self-confident girl of XKCD is _not_ looking for love online.
That depends on their situation. The smart, "aggressive, self-confident" girl who has just moved to a new area might find OKcupid an efficient way to meet new people.
Even the women that are "aggressive" and have an outward air of self-confidence, aren't usually like that on the inside. Most people have insecurities of some form.
Re:if you're a guy, be self-effacing (Score:5, Interesting)
Women wants:
- I want someone, right or wrong, to start a family with now now NOW NOW NOWNOWNOW.
- He must be making at least above median salary for a professional in the area.
- His hobbies must exactly parallel my own.
- He must be as much a dogmatized zealot as I am.
- He must be athletically built and be "smart, witty, and able to surprise me". (this is usually in conjunction with three or more of the other wants as well).
- "I want a man who knows what he wants." I've actually seen it spelled out that plainly, and all I can think to say is "no, no you don't"I still don't know what it means, because women who have said that have absolutely come to hate me for expressing my expectations honestly.
- HE MUST LOVE BASEBALL AS MUCH AS I DO. (note, this means watching professional baseball, not actually PLAYING a sport. No, that would be interesting and show some character of the person.)
My wants:
- I want someone technically minded that I can communicate with, on even a simple level. I don't expect the person to be able to read circuit diagrams or understand packet captures, but PLEASE at least understand to check to make sure the mouse is plugged in before complaining that "it's broken".
- I would prefer someone who can read and speak at a level above that of an eighth grade junior high school student.
- At the risk of being superficial, I would prefer to not be able to wear her jeans and they be baggy.
And I'm not even stereotyping, I mean, I am, but this is literally how it is. Half of them appear to be looking for at immediate meal ticket/family man, and the other half are looking for the male lead from their favorite romantic comedy. I just want someone who will at least nod, smile, and pretend to care when I'm talking to them about my day, who can figure out how to change the remote batteries on her own, and who isn't cutting off the circulation to my legs when she's on top. If those are huge demands, then I guess I'm just an misogynistic, judgmental asshole.
My big realization was that, due to societal norms, there's maybe 1% of the female population out there that fits my criteria. That's one of the reasons why I stopped going to bars for women and started trying the online thing. I figured I could expose myself to a larger pool of candidates. I should have guessed that there was a very specific type of people that have to resort to such measures.
The aggressive, self-confident girl of XKCD is _not_ looking for love online.
True, but she's not looking for love in bars either. She would have already found hers long ago.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:if you're a guy, be self-effacing (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty hilarious. You can be confident and have shit to do without talking about all the shit you have, although the fact that you can't tell the difference makes me chuckle.
Re: (Score:2)
Whoops, gotta go to the gym in like 26 minutes. And when I say Gym, i mean grocery store. Nothing like carrying 10 bags of 2 ltr Mt Dew to your car every day.
Hax you later baby, for one day I will learn the code to those soft cotton panties with the lace trim. *wink*
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think the writer knows what self-effacing means
I don't think you do (hint: efface [merriam-webster.com] != efficacy [merriam-webster.com]).
Why is this on /. again? (Score:2)
We've got no chance , no matter how much theory we know.
Re: (Score:2)
I am more concerned about the 'again' part. This story is a 2 year old blog-post. I am pretty sure it was linked too the first time around too.
Re:Why is this on /. again? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously it won't work. He's only taking one part of two pi roots. That's like ordering a salad.
To summarize: (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Says you... (Score:2)
Re:Says you... (Score:5, Interesting)
They may be out there, but the unfortunate part is that none of them initiate the conversations. I don't consider myself an unattractive person, but I've never had a woman wink/poke/etc. or initiate conversation. It's like they all just post their profile and hope someone picks them. I may as well go out to a bar with that sort of "dating". As usual, it's always up to the guy to start the conversation and the woman gets to weed out the candidates.
It's not like I don't start conversations. I've had many on these sites and sometimes we meet up, other times we call it before. It's mainly that I have to do all the legwork to get things rolling. For once, It would be nice to have someone else start the ball rolling.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Says you... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
As usual, it's always up to the guy to start the conversation and the woman gets to weed out the candidates.
That's human nature. Get over it, or get used to being alone.
Re: (Score:2)
Out of the 4 women I've met up with so far on OKcupid (and meeting another next week), I think 3 of them contacted me first. Maybe all 4, I can't remember. Likewise I've been chatting regularly to someone who lives thousands of miles away (and would date her if the opportunity came up - she has moved around a lot with her job, and actually did her Masters degree in the city where I live right now), and she contacted me first.
Re: (Score:3)
I met my girlfriend of four years now on okcupid. We've talked about this very thing. So one day she logged on to show me her inbox. She was getting like 2-3 messages per day even though her profile was marked with her no longer being single. When she was single, she was getting like a dozen messages per day.
So yeah, she didn't feel the desire to respond to most of that, and didn't need to spend a lot of time looking around at random profiles.
Impressive stats (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
So, twitter users really are a bunch of wankers. :)
The only number that really matters (Score:3, Interesting)
no: height (Score:5, Insightful)
women complain men are obsessed with t&a but women are exactly the same: if you're not tall, it doesn't matter if you are a CEO and run 3 charities: she'll pick the tall guy who still lives with his mom
Re:no: height (Score:5, Funny)
Re:no: height (Score:5, Insightful)
I found my lovely ChemE, Dr. Who-loving, intelligent geek on a free dating site. He is inches shorter than I am.
He was also thrillingly literate in his profile and our email exchanges (I initiated). We shared interests and ideas. It was lovely.
Height is nice, but it's more like good hair than IQ: a bonus, not a value with "above average" as a minimum. I've dated men taller than I am and some who are shorter. Tall is not a requirement. I know several guys who are shorter than average who all have girlfriends or have dated successfully.
If you think that your height is sole the thing keeping women from you, you are classifying your whole dating pool as shallow. It isn't complimentary, and it's demonstrably inaccurate. Your bitterness will not help you get dates, and your insulting view of women will not get you a relationship with a healthy woman.
Women who will disqualify someone just for height are obviously prejudiced in a way that should be a turn-off for you anyway. It's a good weed-out. Focus on improving and highlighting the things that are positive about yourself in order to find the lady that will be interested in you for who you are, what you've accomplished, and how you present yourself, rather than just deciding that all women are shallow and you have no chance.
Also, check your expectations: if you think that a woman you date has to be a super-hottie and a rocket scientist, well, you may want to consider that hot rocket scientist ladies have a much broader field to choose from. I recommend lowering standards to the more achievable: someone you find attractive, finds you attractive, and is smart enough that you enjoy talking with, and someone you share interests and a sense of humor with.
And maybe be a little less obvious about your opinion that women are shallow, irrational creatures.
Re: (Score:2)
What the fuck are you talking about? My wife and I are both overweight and we met each other just fine.
Surprisingly Arrogant (Score:2)
"But ideally you should just disbelieve the whole thing. It can help your love life, and, besides, if there really was a god, wouldn’t first messages always get a reply?"
I suppose they had to end the article in an e
Re: (Score:3)
It's not arrogant to make assertions that are backed up by data. It's even less arrogant to make those assertions in a humorous way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The blog article should not be construed as an attempt at courtship, and should not be used as a model for communication within a relationship.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'll just have to stick with the one wife.
How do you start with atheism and end up at polygamy?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy#Religion [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Non-sequiturs seem to be rife when religious people talk about this kind of thing.
An acquaintance the other day, apparently parroting his minister, jumped straight from the subject of homosexuality, to that of paedophilia, as if they were inherently related.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you kidding? Someone's religion informs a great deal about them. From their outlook on life, their expectations from a partner, to how they spend their weekends, all of that can be tied up in their religion. If you enjoy going to clubs and drinking and dancing every Friday and Saturday night, you're not going to be happy dating or married to an Orthodox Jew or evangelical Christian, for instance.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
just because someone's religious, doesn't mean you should flat out ignore them as a prospective partner in crime, which doesn't pay
I'll tell you now, I don't think I could manage a serious relationship with someone who was so religious that they felt the need to mention it in their dating profile / opening message. I just get the feeling that over the months and years, they'd get resentful of me commenting that it's all bollocks. Or, they'd spend their life with the unhappy knowledge that the man they loved was going to suffer eternal damnation...
Similarly, I don't think I could manage a serious relationship with a very right wing pers
Re:Surprisingly Arrogant (Score:5, Interesting)
This is what you fail to understand: Religious people look very stupid and somewhat insane to the non-religious. How can anyone be expected to form a serious relationship with someone they view as stupid and insane? This is not a troll or a dig but simply a statement of fact. Whether it is fair or not, that's the way non-religious people feel.
Bye, bye karma!
Re: (Score:2)
Oddly everyone can tell you how not to get a girl (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I can tell you what has worked with me (a reasonably typical actual geek female) in the past:
- As TFA suggests, communicating well. If you don't care enough to express yourself well then why should I care enough to listen?
- Don't be an egotist (again, the TFA suggests this). If you're wonderful, I'll figure it out; don't brag to me.
- Be interesting, not generic. By this I mean why say, "I like to read books" - well, no shit, Sherlock, but what books? Why?
- Don't be cynical. "This probably won't work/this is
Re:Oddly everyone can tell you how not to get a gi (Score:4, Interesting)
Do be employed, don't live at home.
Ugh. I'm responding to this just because I've had this exact discussion with my girlfriend (full disclosure - I met her on a dating site). My question always is: I've been unemployed in the past. Sometimes for more than a few months. I've had shitty night-shift jobs to cover living expenses. Yet I'm apparently awesome enough that she sticks around. So why let a temporary situation that has nothing to do with who I am dictate whether to get to know me? The answer I got back was the same as yours - that the quality of the nest is an important part of women being attracted to men. Well, fine, but then don't go bitch to me about how there are no good men around. You're artificially reducing the pool of available men based on a criteria that is utterly temporary and is only marginally related to who that person is.
Furthermore, why stop at a man being unemployed? Why not just flat out say "He has to make at least 50K a year and own at least 800 square feet of home? Why not 100k? Why not a 2000 square foot home? Because those are just material things that are not important to a person? Yeah.... if that's your response, you're just papering over the fact that you have decided that someone like that is probably out of your league. You decided your price was employment and their own place, others decided that their price was 100k and 2000 square feet.
I'm not going to date an out-of-work guy and I think he probably shouldn't be dating either as he has bigger problems to work on than being dateless.
Really? The only thing he should be doing is to find a job? No social life, no meeting new people, no going out on a date in the park? You do realize that the only people who work like that are people who don't socialize to begin with, right? Not to mention that the social network is what keeps people going in tough times? And don't feed me the line that dating is different from socializing. Dating is just socializing with a different end-goal in mind.
The point of my post, and the larger point of TFA, is that without getting past that first part you can't get to the part that involves timing, spark or luck.
And my point to you is that I'm tired of hearing women complain about the lack of men, when their selection criteria contain items that have nothing to do with what makes a relationship successful. Unless, of course, your measurement of a successful relationship is the number of digits in your bank account.
Re: (Score:3)
You think it's about numbers, it's not.
Having a job vs. not having a job is a phase change. Making 35k vs. making 350k is, to me at least, not relevant.
I've dated men who were poor - my most was a social worker who made 25k a year. To me, what's important is that they have SOMETHING gainful to do in their lives, and by "gainful" I mean useful, important, purposeful going on. Employment status is often - not always - but often - a good gauge of whether someone is an adult and whether they are the kind of per
Re: (Score:3)
And so you think that means women are "bitches and whores" - your words.
You want to go on a misogynistic rant, that's perfectly fine, but you should know that it makes you sound like a truly awful person.
Let me ask you this: What kind of women do you think those men who include their income information in their OKC profile are trying to attract? If that information is supposed to be irrelevant as you're trying to argue, then why would a man include it? If a man doesn't want to attract women who are interest
Andrea Bartz and Brenna Ehrlich at CNN (Score:2)
Andrea Bartz and Brenna Ehrlich are regular contributors to CNN - and every single one of their articles are this kind of drivel. A drinking game could involve their weak attempts at inserting every possible hipster keyword in every article. Their idea of snark is including the sentence 'Not.' at the end of a paragraph. Maybe I'm just getting old, but if this is what passes for humor with people their age, I'm not looking forward to the post-hipster generation one bit.
News? (Score:2)
Self-effacing men may be more successful (Score:2)
Missing info: Live near a big US city (Score:3)
I'm in the UK, not exactly in the middle of nowhere (a medium sized town) but not exactly London either. There are virtually no women on the site within a reasonable distance of me.
It helps to live near New York or Los Angeles.
Re: (Score:2)
When the problem is lack of people, timewasters are the opposite of the problem. Getting any response at all is an achievement.
this is pretty basic stuff (Score:2)
The site said that self-effacing men have greater success rates, with words such as "awkward, apologise, kinda" and "probably" likely to increase success because "appearing unsure makes the writer seem more vulnerable and less threatening".
Let's see how many guys put all of these words in their first messages! :)
From my experience with online dating (been using it mostly on-and-off for a few years), I don't think this is the biggest reason why some (many?) guys have problems finding anyone on these sites. Instead, I think the real issue is two-fold: bad (boring) profiles and bad (boring) pictures. Besides the fact that lots of guys online come off as horribly desperate or think a bathroom pic
I met my wife on OkCupid :^) (Score:2)
I highly recommend it. I did move to the US from Canada to be with her, so whether or not you can find someone who'll match you well within your city is questionable, but seriously, give it a try before pay sites like eHarmony. (Not to mention that just by its nature, it's far more geek-friendly; the people behind the site code a lot of C++ and are big math people.) Protips: Answer as many of the questions as you can, since that's how it matches you. More questions answered equals better matches. Ask q
Be self-effacing? Really? (Score:2)
self-effacing (s lf -f s ng). adj. Not drawing attention to oneself; modest.
Yes, be self-effacing because women don't like successful, rich, powerful, well-known, flashy guys. That is why rock stars, movie stars, professional athletes, etc. find it so hard to meet women and get laid.
/sarcasm
Hey, OKCupid, why don't you do a study about the physical characteristics of those who get the most messages and most replies? Say, height, weight, body type, fitness level, rated appearance, and appare
Perfect profile text (Score:2)
According to the tips, I get the following text would be perfect:
How's it going. I'm sorry I'm an cool atheist, but I noticed that your name pretty much shows a good taste, haha. I also apologize that my favourite movies are awesome. I'm think vegetarian zombie metal bands are pretty good, but grad school physics literature is kinda fascinating, too. I'm curious what pretty awkward tattoos you probably won't mention, lol.
Self-effacing (Score:4, Funny)
I try to be self-deprecating, but I suck at it.
It's about communication (Score:2)
This being slashdot, I don't expect that many of you will understand this advice. Nevertheless, here goes:
A big turn-off is someone who does not know how to communicate well. A relationship and a marriage are all about communication. This article is about a written introduction that makes a first impression, so you want to look your best. It's the same reason you would think carefully about what to wear and where to go on a first date.
Starting off with sexy talk is typically a turn off to a person lookin
Re: (Score:3)
Besides, trolling for sex in a place that advertises relationships isn't very honest.
From what I've been told, OK Cupid is very much used by people of both genders, looking for low commitment hook-ups.
Though not exclusively -- a friend of mine married someone he met on OK Cupid.
Do the opposite! (Score:3)
The author is single ;)
Need help? Start here. (Score:2)
"Taking a short break right at work and noticed that you looked at my profile so I looked at yours too. :) Hi! :) Randomly, what's your take on Monty Python, There's Something About Mary and O Brother Where Art Thou? :)"
My eyes have gone, (Score:2)
I love you more, Slashdot (Score:4, Funny)
I love your mind, am fascinated by everything you say, and think your interests are amazing. And also, I suck, and am not worthy of someone as amazing as you. And yes, I *do* agree that that bitch at work has no business talking shit about you behind your back.
Here was me thinking (Score:4, Funny)
2009 called CNN (Score:3)
I'm too old and marired, but I've heard... (Score:3)
...two theories from e-dating users. They're somewhat contradictory.
1) The gender balance is skewed, leading to women shopping from a large pool of available men. This makes sense, as it seems to follow typical mating behavior in American culture (ie, men solicit women, women choose which man to accept) as well as following a sort of larger skew of technology use.
It was also thought that younger women (under 35?) of average or better appearance generally have more real-world dating options than men do as they are more likely to be solicited by men than women in day-day life, thus reducing their interest in online dating.
The first opinion came from a friend of mine who'd I'd describe as generally attractive and in great physical shape but overly picky. I think he used match.com and e-harmony. I think if he had been less picky, or had taken profile answers with a grain of salt (ie, assuming that some answers may have been weakly held preferences instead of assuming they were zealously held beliefs, cast in stone) he might have had a bigger pool to draw from.
2) Once you get outside the pool of women looking for a husband (ie, over 35-40, with white-collar careers and either never married or divorced, the chances of getting dates goes up significantly.
The theory behind this is that this pool of women are (no longer?) interested in the fairy tale of husband, kids, house in the suburbs, etc and are more interested in general companionship, casual dating, etc. They have good paying jobs and are generally comfortable in their single status and don't "need" a man for economic and social security. They're also on the declining side of physical attractiveness, and thus are less likely to believe they can be picky, especially if they are competing with women 10 years younger. I've heard this theory before and it makes some sense.
The second theory was from a guy who I would describe as of below-average appearance -- moderately overweight, and neither a snappy dresser or well-groomed. He seemed happy and said he went on "first dates" every couple of weeks and occasionally second and third dates but said he was more interested in having fun than finding a life partner.
My guess is that if you choose from the right pool and aren't overly picky, you'll do OK. It probably sucks to be 29 and trying to use online dating as I think the expectations of young women are really unrealistic.
I've had great success there... (Score:3)
... and I start all my messages the same way: "I put on my robe and wizard hat..." [albinoblacksheep.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
U cry?
Boom, your mind just exploded.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I can't comment on the homosexual side of things, I presume that there is less nagging and hormones in general
Aha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Wrong, 'cos gay or straight, you're still in a relationship!
Re: (Score:2)
As someone in a relationship, I cannot see why people would want to go through all the nagging, barking madness, and second guessing that a relationship brings, not when you have a lovely computer and/or cats to spend your time with instead.
So why are you still in the relationship?
Re: (Score:3)
I agree, but what does that have to do with running a spellchecker on your message before you send it to someone on OKCupid? :)
Re: (Score:3)
diorcc;
I got the impression ( from my superficial slashdot skimming ) that all the authors are advising people to do is to run a spellchecker on their messages, avoid "pig l33t" ( u R so funny! lol ) and talk to other people like they are people ( versus sex objects, etc ).
That is hardly being someone you are not.
Re:Alright, I know how to be now. (Score:4, Funny)
I'm a leet misanthrope, you insensitive clod!
Also: first time on /. for a good while - what's with all the spam?
Re: (Score:2)
One of the points in the summary was to bring up specific common interests. That's about as far away from telling someone to be different as you can get.
Re:Alright, I know how to be now. (Score:5, Insightful)
Hey, I liked your message.
Don't you find that changing how you communicate is different from changing who you are? I think all communication is very much a game with rules. Breaking the rules does get you sent off the field in any game.
How would you feel about a footballer who doesn't want to play his best game because it would change who he was? (Scoring goals is too mainstream, it's just not me! ) I'd call that player a fool, but maybe that's just me.
Let me know what you think,
Alex
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
But the idea is, I think, to try to highlight the non-moronic facets of your personality in a first greeting. What seems "catchy" or "witty" when you are alone in your basement, it turns out, is not landing properly on the recipient. I can say "yoh, wutz upxxor" to my brother, because he knows me and can
Re: (Score:3)
I disagree, I believe that people should be constantly evaluating and giving consideration to all information they take in. After making decisions about who they want to be, they should change themselves to become the person they want to be.
Example: If you don't think you're a douchebag, but everyone is telling you that you are, then maybe you should consider the possibility that you really are a douchebag and you just didn't know it. Assuming that you are in fact a douchebag, you should consider whether it
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like I don't do any of the "bad" stuff anyway. And the last few people I've chatted to on OKcupid have contacted me first. By the sounds of what they say to me, most of the other guys on OKcupid are rather sleazy or boring.
Re: (Score:3)
There is a difference between changing who you are and better showing off your good points. The thing is, we all have good and bad points about ourselves and first impressions are important. If someone's bad points come through right at the beginning, it's hard to see past them and since relationships are hard work, people don't want to waste their time.
It's no different than having a polished CV. A piece of paper doesn't change who you are, you'll still be the same person no matter what you write on it, or
Re: (Score:2)
That negative correlaton list is just that; a list of correlations, not causations.
Changing "ur" and "wat" to "your" and "what" won't necessarily improve the sentence in which those words were placed.
"U so fine, ima won 2 cut u up 'n' keep u in boxen in me bassment" isn't improved much by writing it as "You're so fine, I want to cut you up and keep you in boxes in my basement".
Utilizing comprehensive vocabulary negates not intellectual defficiencies.
Re:Alright, I know how to be now. (Score:5, Informative)
I disagree, the first makes me want to cut out my eyeballs to not have to read that drivel, the second makes me realize the person sending it is a psychopath.
Both would end bad if you met up, but the latter is clear, concise and legible as compared to the former being written by a 5 year old or a mental patient who can barely communicate over shouting his own name as a reply.
Re:Alright, I know how to be now. (Score:5, Interesting)
If you believe in God, great, but your first contact with someone shouldn't be: "Hey! I really really love God! Maybe we could go to a prayer-meeting sometime?". Even if the other person believes in God too, they'll probably think you're a tad weird. Similarly, if your first contact is: "hye thr saw ur profiel n u lk rly hot", it doesn't matter whether you are the most kind-hearted, baby-kissingest, puppy-lovingest charity worker ever to volunteer at a soup-kitchen, you'll come across as a shallow dummy who can't even be bothered to spell the most basic words correctly.
tl;dr No-one's saying you have to change who you are, they're just offering tips on how to present yourself.
Re: (Score:3)
Here's the thing: when you tell people not to change who they are to impress others, the presumption is that they're decent people in the first place.
An arrogant fatass who is barely literate and unable to form a single coherent thought into a full sentence, who only comments on boobies, and who doesn't show any interests other than in boobies and himself?
That dude needs to change, not to impress some lady but simply because he's a fucking awful person.
Re: (Score:2)
I hope I have some personality or I am SOL.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't be hard on yourself. I read a lot of blogs from dating experts and many people have experiences similar to yours. You are actually handling things quite well by asking these women out and putting an end to pointless pen palmanship ( or giving a chance for something to happen ).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Some things that seem to work. (Score:2)
As soon as I ask them if they'd like to meet up, they go quiet and never message me again. <PotKettle>It's clear to me why these people are on a dating website, they have no personality</PotKettle>.
Has anyone actually had any luck with this, because at the moment I've paid £90 for 3 month's worth of pen-friends.
I've actually had good success with dating sites. It has lead to some great first dates, many subsequent dates and two very nice longer term relationships. The current relationship is very rewarding. I don't consider my self much of geek anymore, though I really enjoy geeky things. I think what helped with me is the following:
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, congressman.
Re: (Score:2)
.. but the OKCupid stats can't tell you about other dating sites.
Re: (Score:3)