The 'fresh meat' effect on OLD

[Starfish82]

Has anyone else noticed how you get a ton of messages when you first sign up to an OLD site but this slows over the next week or two down to almost nothing by the third week? I have tried match.com, eharmony and Tinder and it's all the same. It's frustrating that I pay for a month or three months and then after the first couple of weeks there's very little activity. I'm female by the way and don't believe in making the first move so I like to have guys search me out and email me first.

 

Is it because everyone on the site is looking for 'fresh meat' as it were, or is it something to do with the algorithms working behind the scenes on those sites? If the latter, is there a way to game the system - by for example deleting your profile and signing up again - has anyone tried this?

 

I tend to believe it is to do with the algorithms because I get dozens of messages a day for the first week or so and my profile hasn't changed! Also on sites like eharmony and Tinder, where other people can't tell whether you're new or not, there's just no other explanation.

 

Help!

[Larryville]

is there a way to game the system - by for example deleting your profile and signing up again - has anyone tried this?

 

Good Point

 

I only stay on a given site for 30 days, no matter what. When it comes to a site like Match, I won’t bother to pay until I have browsed and seen beforehand that there are specific profiles that I might contact.

 

What Match does by hiding all of those “interested” and “likes” but hides those are such complete BS it’s not funny.

 

Too many men bite and give in to those “likes” when they are simply dummy profiles, scams.

 

I get significantly more scam profile likes on Match than any other site.

 

I think it's important to completely delete your profile instead of keeping it up but inactive.

[smackie9]

I though a lot of these sites automatically suggest matches? Once you are "matched" with whomever, then of course things will slow down because it's already alerted all the costumer base.

[SoThatHappened]

I was on and off OLD for about a year. I had some success meeting women, and am happily with a girl I met from from one of the sites.

 

However, I hate OLD. It's a business, there are scammers, flakers, fakers, women who have no business dating, etc.

 

In my experience, about 1 out of 10 women on there are actually ready to date, take it seriously, are not scammers, are not flakers, etc.

 

What I hate about the "business" side of it is exactly what you eluded to in the OP:

 

- Sign up, and immediately get tons of matches, likes, and messages

- 2 weeks later, nothing

- Discontinue your membership (but leave your profile open), and all of a sudden get tons of likes and messages. Really?

 

It's a way for people to make money, and they use those tricks to take more money from you.

 

From my experience, just make the first move to anyone you find interesting and don't wait for them to contact you.

[coolheadal]

If money is involved you can sample by being placed to the top of the list and get swamped by messages. Once the cool down period is over you have to pay for boosting your profile up.

[Larryville]

I though a lot of these sites automatically suggest matches? Once you are "matched" with whomever,

 

Smack they are not specifically “Matches.” The first few days using algorithms they highlight some profiles of presumable “active” people and cycle those the first few days you are on a website to give you the illusion of “choices”

 

STH: Online dating can do ONE thing that would make it better for its subscribers.

 

Simply don’t have inactive profiles.

 

If I could create a site, I would have it hide inactive profiles maybe 5 days or more on inactive activity.

 

Highlight profiles that are currently “paid” subscribers. Match does do the green highlight box to indicate upgraded profiles.

 

In my experience, about 1 out of 10 women on there are actually ready to date

 

You know how you can tell these women? Typically women who have lots of “vacation” or scenic type pictures.

 

Pictures with WAY too many "group" shots, party shots with multiple people the illusion of having LOTS of fun.

[coolheadal]

OLD = online dating

Pictures that are not clear

Pictures with the woman or guy hold the cell phone

Pictures where you only see the woman back of her hairline (exist)

If they have no picture skip

If they have young picture then the last one is what they really look like.

People lie about they're age..

I seen a woman say she was 45 and turn out to be 65 Wow wee!

Popular OLD lets anything go though. Women like to be married and play games

Still get pushed to the top of the queue list.

[CaliforniaGirl]

OLD = online dating

Pictures that are not clear

Pictures with the woman or guy hold the cell phone

Pictures where you only see the woman back of her hairline (exist)

If they have no picture skip

If they have young picture then the last one is what they really look like.

People lie about they're age..

I seen a woman say she was 45 and turn out to be 65 Wow wee!

Popular OLD lets anything go though. Women like to be married and play games

Still get pushed to the top of the queue list.

 

I think everyone pretty much knows this...the question was more about an initial surge and then no/few matches.

 

People definitely lie on OLD, yes. When I was in in my early 30s I was constantly approached by 40somethings (they said) who used faded pics, even pics of physical pics (yes) that were obviously years old, and they invariably turned up at the date older, fatter and shorter. It was almost routine.

 

So yes, that happens. Careful angles, old pics, pics from a thousand feet away in a sports cap on a boat with the body entirely obscured by a gigantic life vest and so on. But that's not what the OP is talking about here. She hasn't even gotten to the stage of actually meeting the people and seeing if they're for real.

[Larryville]

It's frustrating that I pay for a month or three months and then after the first couple of weeks there's very little activity.

 

Bottom line because they already got your money.

 

I have a Match profile, right now I have 35 people “supposedly” interested in me, tons of likes, hundreds of people who browsed my profile. There are maybe (2) women near me that if I paid for a subscription, I would be even interested in contacting. I already know most of those “likes” are complete BS.

[SoThatHappened]

STH: Online dating can do ONE thing that would make it better for its subscribers.

...

If I could create a site, I would have it hide inactive profiles maybe 5 days or more on inactive activity.

I don't see that as being a big issue and that's not the complaint of the OP.

 

I don't mind if someone wasn't active for 5 days. I've been off for 5 days or more just because I got busy. Doesn't mean I wasn't still using the site.

 

It's the fact that you're matched up like crazy when you first get on or right after you cancel your subsciption but leave your profile open.

 

The latter is why I say it's just a way to try to get more money out of you. All of sudden some woman from 2,000 miles away messages me 1 hour after cancelling my subscription? Feels a little like a scam to me.

[Larryville]

All of sudden some woman from 2,000 miles away messages me 1 hour after cancelling my subscription? Feels a little like a scam to me.

 

I guess for me is I won’t pay for a subscription unless there would be several profiles of women I had identified that I am specifically interested in pursuing. Some woman emailing me from 2,000 miles away is not serious about meeting me.

 

Still to me the scam is "inactive" or barely active profiles clogging up sites and women who are on these sites to just simply "play"

[central]

Many people on OLD sites have been there awhile. They've already checked out all the other members of interest, so naturally will all gravitate to the 'fresh meat,' in hopes of finding someone and making contact before all the other hopefuls. After that initial feeding frenzy, interest drops off, and starts to reflect the frequency of new members arriving, and old members leaving.

[LookAtThisPOst]

Has anyone else noticed how you get a ton of messages when you first sign up to an OLD site but this slows over the next week or two down to almost nothing by the third week? I have tried match.com, eharmony and Tinder and it's all the same. It's frustrating that I pay for a month or three months and then after the first couple of weeks there's very little activity. I'm female by the way and don't believe in making the first move so I like to have guys search me out and email me first.

 

Is it because everyone on the site is looking for 'fresh meat' as it were, or is it something to do with the algorithms working behind the scenes on those sites? If the latter, is there a way to game the system - by for example deleting your profile and signing up again - has anyone tried this?

 

I tend to believe it is to do with the algorithms because I get dozens of messages a day for the first week or so and my profile hasn't changed! Also on sites like eharmony and Tinder, where other people can't tell whether you're new or not, there's just no other explanation.

 

Help!

 

I find that if I email a woman that's brand spanking new to a dating site, or even online dating in general. I can score a date.

 

The longer these people are on these sites, they more they tend to get unreasonably about who they even meet...some get quite jaded, that's why it's refreshing to see newcomers as they are actually willing to REPLY to an email. lol

[SevenCity]

With match I've read that there are tons of inactive profiles and only paid members can respond to emails.

 

It sucks, but makes sense from a business perspective. Would you rather sign up to a site with 10,000 members or 1,000,000?

 

That's how they get you in.

 

EHarmony has been ok and less scammers but I haven't got more dates from it than POF or Bumble.

 

I'm always tempted to sign up for zoosk as they have the best looking women in their email messages but I heard it's a complete scam.

 

Thus far bumble has the best quality women I've seen.

[smackie9]

I think anything internet related is a "scam".

[Larryville]

With match I've read that there are tons of inactive profiles and only paid members can respond to emails.

 

Yes, not to mention that Match is more expensive to subscribe to.

 

In my area it’s pointless to subscribe to Match. About 60 percent of the profiles are on POF anyway.

 

However a number of women have been groomed to think that the “quality” of men who are on Match are more “serious” because they are “paying” for the expensive membership thereby more serious.

 

Smack… YES pretty much LOL!

[SevenCity]

Yes, not to mention that Match is more expensive to subscribe to.

 

In my area it’s pointless to subscribe to Match. About 60 percent of the profiles are on POF anyway.

 

However a number of women have been groomed to think that the “quality” of men who are on Match are more “serious” because they are “paying” for the expensive membership thereby more serious.

 

Smack… YES pretty much LOL!

 

I'll be honest that I thought women on eHarmony were more "serious" as well. They are not. It's the same type of women you find on POF.

 

The biggest issue is you can't list body type preferences. Why match me up with your special algorithm if I find the girl unattractive?

 

At least they stopped the whole question requirement and now you can direct message. Still the same results as free sites - low percentage of responses.

[Larryville]

I'll be honest that I thought women on eHarmony were more "serious" as well. They are not. It's the same type of women you find on POF.

 

People don’t realize it about population density… each OLD site does not have “a specific group” of women populating the sites.

 

I know some women who have been on POF for example for YEARS. And typically the same woman would be on as many as 4 different sites. (you can browse many times without becoming a member of the site).

 

The biggest issue is you can't list body type preferences. Why match me up with your special algorithm if I find the girl unattractive?

 

You can on many sites, highlight body type preferences in your search parameters. The trick is will a woman be honest about her body type. Way too many are totally clueless about their “type.” If they have in the profiles something along the line of "accept me as I am" type BS, that is more of a clue to avoid.

 

What is more important to me is "self-esteem" someone who is active, confident and healthy. I avoid self hating types or those with body image issues.

[LookAtThisPOst]

People don’t realize it about population density… each OLD site does not have “a specific group” of women populating the sites.

 

I know some women who have been on POF for example for YEARS. And typically the same woman would be on as many as 4 different sites. (you can browse many times without becoming a member of the site).

 

 

 

You can on many sites, highlight body type preferences in your search parameters. The trick is will a woman be honest about her body type. Way too many are totally clueless about their “type.” If they have in the profiles something along the line of "accept me as I am" type BS, that is more of a clue to avoid.

 

What is more important to me is "self-esteem" someone who is active, confident and healthy. I avoid self hating types or those with body image issues.

 

Yeah, some will say they haven't weighed themselves, so they don't know (or don't want to know) That is something that should be part of someone's normal daily or weekly activities like grooming.

 

I'll be honest that I thought women on eHarmony were more "serious" as well. They are not. It's the same type of women you find on POF.

 

Yea, I would see the same line-up of the same faces across every platform in my area. But this also speaks volumes of their longevity and lack of success in even meeting someone. They wind up permanent fixtures of the site for years.

[GemmaUK]

Yeah, some will say they haven't weighed themselves, so they don't know (or don't want to know) That is something that should be part of someone's normal daily or weekly activities like grooming.

 

Why should it be part of a daily or weekly activity?

I haven't weighed myself in about 3 years.

I'm a UK dress size 6-10 which is US size 2-6, my clothes fit - erring on the smaller ones just now - but they fit.

 

Fresh meat is a thing.

When I have signed up on OLD I get the same guys mailing who mailed me the last time I signed up - and those who mailed when I was still active and looking - they'd come back and back repetitively.

 

A guy I knew said that men go look at whichever new photos came up - hence the reason why people change their pics often - to get in the new pics list.

[SevenCity]

People don’t realize it about population density… each OLD site does not have “a specific group” of women populating the sites.

 

I know some women who have been on POF for example for YEARS. And typically the same woman would be on as many as 4 different sites. (you can browse many times without becoming a member of the site).

 

I realized this as well. I was really hoping it wasn't the case as I took eH more seriously. I no longer do.

 

I too have seen women (attractive women) who are on these sites since I started 5 months ago. Funny how they can't seem to find a relationship.

 

You can on many sites, highlight body type preferences in your search parameters. The trick is will a woman be honest about her body type. Way too many are totally clueless about their “type.” If they have in the profiles something along the line of "accept me as I am" type BS, that is more of a clue to avoid.

 

What is more important to me is "self-esteem" someone who is active, confident and healthy. I avoid self hating types or those with body image issues.

 

Yes, POF lets you search by body type but eHarmony just sends you matches based on your answering of questions. None of those questions include any physical descriptions because I guess they feel it doesn't matter (hint: it does). Only "physical" attribute you can select is an age range.

 

Height is really important to me in a woman. I typically won't date a girl over 5'6" - 5'7" but prefer them 5'0" - 5'2" (I'm 6' for reference). Dating a girl who is 5'10" has no appeal to me. I can imagine this is frustrating for women as they often want a guy of a certain height as well.

 

Same with body type. I like thin girls. A girl can match me 100% on beliefs and values but if she's not thin I'm not going to be interested. Why waste my time and hers?

 

And yes, many lie, use camera trickery, or old photos. I don't understand how this works when you show up in person only to be 10 years older or 60 lbs heavier (which has happened with a couple dates).

 

I want to look like my pics do - if not how can the girl not feel disappointed? Sure, use your best pics but don't hide your body and expect it won't be brought to light on your first date.

[basil67]

You're all over thinking it - it's exactly the same as selling a car online.

 

Everyone knows what's already for sale. If you were interested in one, you've then looked at it and ruled it out. The cars which have been listed for a while haven't sold because they are over valued for what they are. Yes, I could look at the ones which haven't sold, but if nobody else is buying then there's probably a good reason.

 

But the new car which gets listed? Could be worth looking at.