truth_seeker Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 This is a big problem with OLD. You meet people who are jaded. They might be good people, possibly even great catches, but once they get played or rejected more than once, they become less enthusiastic and pessimistic. By the time they do meet a great person, they're so jaded that the great person thinks they're not a great catch and walks away.
Emilia Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 The tricky part of OLD is the screening. People fill out their profiles based on how they see themselves, often that can be very different from how others see them - especially if they don't get out that much. I found the initially stages of communication hit and miss, it's only later on when you get better at judging who they are after some correspondence. It's so much easier in real life where screening is based on your perceived reality, not on theirs.
zengirl Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Screening = comparing and assessing elements to an established standard. It's no different than going to market and buying only organic foods. A comparison is still being made. Screening = analyzing. Analysis is a far different way of seeing the world than comparison. It allows for the assessment of people individually. I'll use an educational analogy. As a teacher, I would never grade on a curve, by sheer student comparison, as I think that's just plain counterproductive. However, I will certainly grade; my preferred method of doing so, when any question is to arise (i.e. there's no concrete "right" answer), is with a rubric. If I were to compare students essays to each other, I would get something very different and much more rudimentary than if I were to base my assessment of them on a pre-designed rubric that was well-thought out. You can say they are the same, but I do not think they are. Of course, we have to assess whether someone is right for us! But we don't need to do so by the fallacy of comparison. Rather, it is better to assess each individual opportunity's strength and weakness on its own merits.
FitChick Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 People fill out their profiles based on how they see themselves, often that can be very different from how others see them - especially if they don't get out that much. That made me laugh and think of that photo of a house cat sitting in front of a mirror and seeing the reflection of a lion. I've met more good men than bad and it's probably due to my careful screening of them and the fact that it's obvious I'm not naive or stupid, so no one is going to fool me for long. It was easier years ago when both men and women were more serious about finding someone. Now everybody, married, single and in between is doing it so there is more crap to wade through.
KathyM Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Perhaps this is cynical but my extensive experience has been that guys that use OLD belong to two groups: 1) Desperate, socially inept men that can't get a date to save their life. 2) Players and/or liars; they are after casual sex, most often cheating on their SO and they don't hesitate to lie about who they are in the process. Am I wrong? Although there are those two groups you mentioned on OLD sites, there are also quality guys that are genuinely looking for a LTR. I know of several quality guys that don't fit into the first two categories that use OLD or have used OLD to meet their SO. A lot of men like the convenience of OLD, as opposed to going out to bars or trying to meet women on the street. It gives you the opportunity to meet many women that you wouldn't otherwise be able to. Just one option that a lot of people do use, and many have been successful with. 2
truth_seeker Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Although there are those two groups you mentioned on OLD sites, there are also quality guys that are genuinely looking for a LTR. I know of several quality guys that don't fit into the first two categories that use OLD or have used OLD to meet their SO. A lot of men like the convenience of OLD, as opposed to going out to bars or trying to meet women on the street. It gives you the opportunity to meet many women that you wouldn't otherwise be able to. Just one option that a lot of people do use, and many have been successful with. Herein lies the problem. You are optimistic, Emilia is pessimistic. You throw 1,000 of KathyM's and Emilia's into the the pool, it becomes one big mess to sift through. Some have patience; others will bow out fast.
FitChick Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 there are also quality guys that are genuinely looking for a LTR. A lot of men like the convenience of OLD, as opposed to going out to bars or trying to meet women on the street. This is what men have told me: "How would I ever have the time when I am in my office from 8am to 8pm every day?" All successful, educated, attractive men who aren't looking for one night stands. Someone who keeps attracting "losers" has to look to him or herself for answers.
truth_seeker Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Herein lies the problem. You are optimistic, Emilia is pessimistic. You throw 1,000 of KathyM's and Emilia's into the the pool, it becomes one big mess to sift through. Some have patience; others will bow out fast. Sorry, I meant ES not Emilia.
Emilia Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 I've met more good men than bad and it's probably due to my careful screening of them and the fact that it's obvious I'm not naive or stupid, so no one is going to fool me for long. Sure but the sheer number of men you must have spoken to just to get a handful of decent ones. It was easier years ago when both men and women were more serious about finding someone. Now everybody, married, single and in between is doing it so there is more crap to wade through. I suspect that's the case yes
USMCHokie Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Screening = analyzing. Analysis is a far different way of seeing the world than comparison. It allows for the assessment of people individually. I'll use an educational analogy. As a teacher, I would never grade on a curve, by sheer student comparison, as I think that's just plain counterproductive. However, I will certainly grade; my preferred method of doing so, when any question is to arise (i.e. there's no concrete "right" answer), is with a rubric. If I were to compare students essays to each other, I would get something very different and much more rudimentary than if I were to base my assessment of them on a pre-designed rubric that was well-thought out. You can say they are the same, but I do not think they are. Of course, we have to assess whether someone is right for us! But we don't need to do so by the fallacy of comparison. Rather, it is better to assess each individual opportunity's strength and weakness on its own merits. This will end up being an argument in semantics. Going along with your educational analogy, after you're done grading your students' essays, how do you determine whether they pass or fail? Generally, you compare each person's score to a cutoff score, right? Regardless of whether you grade each student "independently," they are still being compared via the rubric. Why give out a grade at all if they are not being compared? Why is there a valedictorian of a class? Why doesn't everyone get into the best school? Because they are compared with the performance of everyone else. I see comparison as SO rudimentary that I think our respective definitions don't match, hence our disagreement. If you have a multiple choice exam and are grading using an answer key, simply seeing B on the student's answer sheet, then looking at C in the key, and marking the question wrong is comparison. Grading two tests using the same key is comparison of the tests.
Emilia Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 This is what men have told me: "How would I ever have the time when I am in my office from 8am to 8pm every day?" All successful, educated, attractive men who aren't looking for one night stands. My question is though: where are their friends? Where are their hobbies? Why do they work such long hours? I work with people that spend excessive hours in the office and that's because they don't want to go home and they don't want to go out.
KathyM Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Herein lies the problem. You are optimistic, Emilia is pessimistic. You throw 1,000 of KathyM's and Emilia's into the the pool, it becomes one big mess to sift through. Some have patience; others will bow out fast. OLD is not really any different than meeting people in other ways really--you have to wade through all the frogs before finding the prince you are looking for. No different than in real life. Dating does take a lot of patience, and most people will end up not being a match, but eventually a lot of people do find their SO through that method (OLD). I'm not sure what the figures are now, but a large percentage of people have met their SO through OLD. I know several people personally who have.
zengirl Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 This will end up being an argument in semantics. Going along with your educational analogy, after you're done grading your students' essays, how do you determine whether they pass or fail? Generally, you compare each person's score to a cutoff score, right? Not all assessments are pass/fail. Plenty of rubrics are simply to guide you on your way to better work. Additionally: A rubric, for example, for a literary magazine one edits might accept some pieces and not others, which may sound like pass/fail on a rudimentary level, but it really isn't either. In terms of assessments, most are to judge quality and characteristics of work. "Better than X" is a poor judgement. Rather, assessing things on their own merit gives more concrete, interesting judgments. Even if you are judging to a cut-off, there is not really any need to compare the students to each other but rather to the skills being measured. Regardless of whether you grade each student "independently," they are still being compared via the rubric. Why give out a grade at all if they are not being compared? Generally, these days, grades are assigned and even standardized tests given (though some still use comparisons, but almost all have criterion scores as well these days) for a criterion purpose, which is to gauge mastery. Technically, everyone could pass, even get 100%, really, and that would be ideal. Of course, those aren't subjective things generally, but my point is to say that grades are meant, these days, to measure mastery, not comparison. So your idea there is flawed too, though we're venturing farther from the point. In dating, it is more likely NO ONE will achieve 'mastery' in terms of being a complete fit than that everyone will. This leads some to use comparison as a means of selection; I consider that a mistake. I'd rather have no one than someone who I didn't select purely on his own merits and based on the rubric of my needs. You view life competitively, so it's no wonder you see this as a competition or comparison as well. I do not view life as being competitive, but cooperative. Thus I never worry in suffering "by comparison" but only seek to improve myself consistently. Why is there a valedictorian of a class? Why doesn't everyone get into the best school? Because they are compared with the performance of everyone else. Sure, but that's not got anything to do with my analogy. That's got to do with a finite amount of resources (in the case of school attendance) and a rather messed up system from the past, in terms of valedictorians. There was a time when every class was graded purely on a curve. What a sad time for education that was! (Ages before I was born, of course.) Some countries still do that, but it's a coarse, poor way to do it, IMO. I see comparison as SO rudimentary that I think our respective definitions don't match, hence our disagreement. If you have a multiple choice exam and are grading using an answer key, simply seeing B on the student's answer sheet, then looking at C in the key, and marking the question wrong is comparison. Grading two tests using the same key is comparison of the tests. I think you really just don't know what the word comparison means.
jobaba Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 \ Sure, but that's not got anything to do with my analogy. That's got to do with a finite amount of resources (in the case of school attendance) and a rather messed up system from the past, in terms of valedictorians. There was a time when every class was graded purely on a curve. What a sad time for education that was! (Ages before I was born, of course.) Some countries still do that, but it's a coarse, poor way to do it, IMO. They usually only curve up though. I've never seen them curve down at any level of school.
FitChick Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Why do they work such long hours? Gosh, I have no idea. Hmmm... let me guess... Because they can be replaced by someone who is willing to work those hours when so many are unemployed? To keep their company afloat in today's economic shambles? To pay their mortgage and child support? How silly!
6ft180natl Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Perhaps this is cynical but my extensive experience has been that guys that use OLD belong to two groups: 1) Desperate, socially inept men that can't get a date to save their life. 2) Players and/or liars; they are after casual sex, most often cheating on their SO and they don't hesitate to lie about who they are in the process. Am I wrong? What qualifies as socially inept and are those people not an option if they are attractive and not desperate? 1
zengirl Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 They usually only curve up though. I've never seen them curve down at any level of school. Oh, they used to! They still do 'curve up' these days (to account for poorly made assessments or poor instruction) but only when something has gone wrong and they can't retest easily or don't want to throw out the old scores. That really has little to do with comparison and more to do with, "Oh, frack, no one understood this! The test must've sucked bad!" But for ages, instruction was curve-based, which literally meant X% got As, X% failed, etc, etc. That's not modern-day instruction for good reason, because comparison is a rote way to make judgments.
oaks Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 ES, you may as well have called this thread "please chime in if you want to bash OLD" for all the balance you're going to get in the responses.
Disillusioned Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 I couldn't agree more. Friends encouraged me to do OLD. I forced myself to do it even though I was very uncomfortable with it. After a couple experiences, I quit. Just too many bad apples out there messing it up for the good ones. Tell me about it! I could write a book about the train wrecks I've met on CL. This is a big problem with OLD. You meet people who are jaded. They might be good people, possibly even great catches, but once they get played or rejected more than once, they become less enthusiastic and pessimistic. By the time they do meet a great person, they're so jaded that the great person thinks they're not a great catch and walks away. That's how I became Disillusioned.
USMCHokie Posted June 26, 2012 Posted June 26, 2012 I think you really just don't know what the word comparison means. I'll start with this: comparison: (noun) 1. the act of comparing. 2. the state of being compared. 3. a likening; illustration by similitude; comparative estimate or statement. 4. Rhetoric . the considering of two things with regard to some characteristic that is common to both, as the likening of a hero to a lion in courage. 5. capability of being compared or likened. I generally use the first and fourth definitions, as I feel they are most relevant to dating... In terms of assessments, most are to judge quality and characteristics of work. "Better than X" is a poor judgement. Rather, assessing things on their own merit gives more concrete, interesting judgments. Even if you are judging to a cut-off, there is not really any need to compare the students to each other but rather to the skills being measured. I honestly feel that your education analogy is not the most compelling one you could have offered...mainly because you have a vested interest in all of your students succeeding in your class...and that would be analogous to saying that you want all men to eventually "succeed" with you, whatever that may entail... You view life competitively, so it's no wonder you see this as a competition or comparison as well. I do not view life as being competitive, but cooperative. Thus I never worry in suffering "by comparison" but only seek to improve myself consistently. I do view life competitively, because society is becoming increasingly competitive, and I am a part of that society. How do employers conduct their hiring process? Do they take the very first applicant, give them the job, and keep them around for a while to see how they work out? Doubtful, as it is both wasteful and time-consuming. Instead, they compare candidates to each other based on a predetermined set of criteria and select the best ones to interview (i.e., go on the "first date" with). And with the advent of online dating and the resulting rise of multi-dating, dating has become exactly this. Evaluating profiles based on a set of criteria, narrowing down the pool to a few prospects, and "conducting the interview." Now, you may say that you don't use criteria to "compare" men, even in the online realm, and that you treat them all "individually." I'll try to break it down for you, Barney-style. I assume you're heterosexual, so your first filter is probably "man." The online dating system will compare each profile to this proverbial archetype that is being formed from your criteria to eliminate all women from the pool. You have just compared and contrasted all the profiles with each other based on a particular characteristic and eliminated half the candidates. Congratulations! Now I'd assume that you'd hypothetically want to meet someone within a certain mile radius. The blinky lights and beeps of the computer work, and it compares the locations of the remaining profiles with that of your archetype and eliminates even more profiles. Lather, rinse, repeat with criteria like marital status, age, employment status, etc. and you'll have effective compared and contrasted millions of profiles to whittle it down to a handful. Eventually, as you date more, your criteria will evolve based on previous men you've dated, so with each new criteria, you are comparing all future men with that of previous men. A simple example to illustrate, as it is a bit abstract. You date an unemployed guy, and it sucks. So you add to your criteria: "must be employed." So whenever you filter out an unemployed man, you are essentially comparing that unemployed man's potential for dating with the sh*tty experience you had with the previous unemployed man and eliminating him from the pool. I honestly don't know how to break it down any further...if you want to interpret the word 'comparison' in a way that makes you feel better about yourself, then have at it. I'm just presenting a view of all of this which is logically accurate (to me). And this view of dating may offend some because they feel it's non-PC and don't want to be accused of it themselves... But the bottom line is, online dating: comparison and competition at its finest.
daphne Posted June 26, 2012 Posted June 26, 2012 A couple of weeks ago I'd say that for the most part, the OP was accurate with a few exceptions. Since I've met someone that may be an exception to the rule, the jury's out.
TheFinalWord Posted June 26, 2012 Posted June 26, 2012 Perhaps this is cynical but my extensive experience has been that guys that use OLD belong to two groups: 1) Desperate, socially inept men that can't get a date to save their life. 2) Players and/or liars; they are after casual sex, most often cheating on their SO and they don't hesitate to lie about who they are in the process. Am I wrong? I don't think you're 100% wrong. I think that the other category is those men with busy lives that can get dates, do want a relationship, but want to eliminate people that don't have basic compatibility. OLD can help weed through some of the basics. You also don't have to wonder who has a BF and who does not (in theory ). That's why I use it anyway I don't think I'm any casa nova, but I can get dates. I also don't believe in pre-marital sex so there is no benefit for me to be a player. With that said, there are downsides to OLD. But I know a few friends that have met their current spouse through OLD. From my own experiences though I can totally understand why you are a bit jaded by it!
mesmerized Posted June 26, 2012 Posted June 26, 2012 The possibility of meeting someone decent is very low in my experience. I know a lot of people who used online dating and I know of only ONE girl who met someone decent and married him.
SJC2008 Posted June 26, 2012 Posted June 26, 2012 I'll list the ones that I got past date one: #1. 25 years old (3 dates), texted like twitter, I went for the kiss on 3rd date and got the cheek, then a friendzone text 10 min later. She tried to reconcile and I declined. I thinks she's an alcoholic and when she was trying to reconcile she didn't say "hey let's go out again" which would of been protocol since she fz'd me. She said "I had a great guy", "I'll just drink my problems away", "I wanted you to kiss me", "You don't want a girl like me". Anyway she's and emotional wreck. #2. 31 years old (3dates) (yes ladies there are men who date up in age). Seemed like an absoule sweetie pie. Very cute, nice bod, funny. No convo flow whatsoever, very shy (didn't realize it until later, my IS thought it was my fault). Got a little attitude on date 3 TWICE. Anyway, I gave her a rushed fast kiss because I panicked and was humilited. Not once did she initiate contact through 3 dates and flaked/lied in the end. To subtle for me with my exp to realize she may have been interested. Kinda sad because I crushed hard and fell hard as yall know. #3. 26 years old (1 date, I didn't want to see her again). LIED about body type in profile, head shots only. Give the benefit of the doubt and see what happens. I dont' expect a bikini model as I am chunky but if you have a bigger stomach than I do it's an absoulte deal breaker. Initiaed contact twice after 1st date without me initiating once. Current. 24 years old (2 dates, still talking). Cute, great legs, great breasts.Very reliable. returns all calls and texts. Initiates a little, rescheduled a no go. Playing the dating game perfect. I kissed her at the end of date 2, nothing over the top but had a nice sound to it lol! OTH she seems a little bitter/blunt. This is the one who baffled me and said I was 2 nice when I had done nothing at all to give that vibe. We'll see what happens. So from a mans perspective, including dates that never happened my old exp has been: Gigs flaking after getting a # and setting up a date, emotional baggage, dishonesty and bitterness.
USMCHokie Posted June 26, 2012 Posted June 26, 2012 So from a mans perspective, including dates that never happened my old exp has been: Gigs flaking after getting a # and setting up a date, emotional baggage, dishonesty and bitterness. Luck of the draw, my friend...luck of the draw... 1
Recommended Posts