MissLonelyHeart Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 I have to tell you folks... I have been ITCHING to get your opinions on this topic. Mostly because I know a lot of people have used dating services of one kind or another, and I KNOW people have opinions, and even experiences, that I'd really like to hear. Now, for me, I'm more interested in the services that claim to cater to you, as an individual, and what you're looking for in a mate. The local places especially, more so than the online ones. But I do wonder what some people think of eHarmony.com - I find it very hard to watch their commercials and not think "Oh what a load of bunk!" On a more personal level, I've been in and out of MatchMaker International's services for a while now. Let me tell you what a long, sad joke it's been with them. I can laugh at it now more so because, well... I've already yelled, cried, and said my peace about what a bunch of scam artists I think they are, and so now, my stories end up being amusing for some to read, and especially amusing for *ME* to read. So... let's hear it. If you have an experience, or something to add, I'd LOVE to hear it!!!!!!!!!! MLH
downcydeguy Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 Sorry, but I don't know from personal experience but I have a friend that does it all the time. Long story short, he's still very much SINGLE. And this is after about 4 years of online dating. Sure, his sexual needs are met on occasion, but his loneliness is not. I'm not gonna say that I'm against it at all, though. It seems like a much easier way to weed out certain people by likes/dislikes, etc. However, no online convo can equate to a face to face. If you're interested, I'd say go ahead and try it. What do you have to lose? Good luck.
slubberdegullion Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 I was on Lavalife for a while and met some good people, most are still friends though nothing beyond an FWB situation (which, frankly, suits me just fine, but I'm funny like that). I also tried Campus Kiss which was ok, and met some people through that as well. But I've since deleted my profiles on both. Lavalife is a pay-per-credit thing, and it's too easy to run up a big bill. Campus Kiss was less expensive. Plentyoffish apparently is free, but I don't have any experience with it.
a4a Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 Sorry, but I don't know from personal experience but I have a friend that does it all the time. Long story short, he's still very much SINGLE. And this is after about 4 years of online dating. Sure, his sexual needs are met on occasion, but his loneliness is not. I'm not gonna say that I'm against it at all, though. It seems like a much easier way to weed out certain people by likes/dislikes, etc. However, no online convo can equate to a face to face. If you're interested, I'd say go ahead and try it. What do you have to lose? Good luck. Same here,,,,, never done it myself but I know of 2 males that are or have used eharmony...... neither has or had panned out for them. One had one date with complete mismatch. The other no dates... neither guy is really unattractive at all.... profiles read promising ect... Currently guy 1 has been offered 6 months membership to a "professional and executive" dating service for lunches....... $1,500 for that service. I think if you want to try it......why not, just use the free services tho. a4a
Neptune Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 I tried a couple of local services a number of years ago. The man-woman ratio is almost always many more men to women. I have not used anything online. Here`s why: It is all just too much work. I decided that if I had a clear goal of finding a partner and getting married then maybe the effort would be worth it. I decided I wasn`t really looking for anything commited. If I was going to do anything it would be to do local searches (25 miles) on all the major online sights and make the effort very exclusively. You can burn out fast on all this.
JS17 Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 Read alphamale's recent thread on online dating and that should give you an idea of what you'll find there.
alphamale Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 Read alphamale's recent thread on online dating and that should give you an idea of what you'll find there. yeah JS17, I just gave an update on our numbers a few hrs ago. apparently the young chicks are going krazy for our "dude" and some of them are so dumb they don't realized it is fake.
JS17 Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 see my point. these are the kinds of people that you meet in online dating.
Outcast Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 I think that's a vast over-generalization. I have a friend who's met a guy she likes a lot and another friend has two colleagues who are marrying people they met on a dating site. When there are millions of members of a dating site, it's highly unlikely that all or even the majority of them are seriously flawed.
JS17 Posted November 22, 2005 Posted November 22, 2005 I think that's a vast over-generalization. I have a friend who's met a guy she likes a lot and another friend has two colleagues who are marrying people they met on a dating site. When there are millions of members of a dating site, it's highly unlikely that all or even the majority of them are seriously flawed. I guess I they all must just come to me! I only started it a few weeks ago but so far lots of old and/or married men and men just looking for sex. I like the ones that ask for sex straight out. It saves a lot of time. I do better in the real world. Just my experience
Author MissLonelyHeart Posted November 22, 2005 Author Posted November 22, 2005 Oh, believe me, I have lots of my OWN stories - none of which are GOOD. I tried an online dating service - once. Met *one* local guy. Went on *one* date. He turned out to be only looking for *one* thing. After that, I had no desire to give that place anymore money because the men who were sending me "winks" (I think it was tickle.com) were all pretty much just local players. MatchMaker has been a joke and a half. I'm only still with them because, there's no such thing as a refund with them unless you are wiling to really kick up the dust and take it to court. They're contract is a real piece of work. You should see it. Anyways, I get TONS of "referrals" - then men get maybe one a month (I've asked them), so it's obvious there's more men than women in the program. Sadly, all the men I've been referred to, have serious social issues. It's why they're single and with MM. Sure, MM sends you referrals who match up with what you're looking for in a man - but, that also comes with added extra bonuses, that don't show up in a "back ground check". Example: guess what doesn't show up on a back ground check? Someone being a prejudice, racist jerk. Those are my favorites right next to the ones who think they're going to meet the Paris Hilton of their dreams with MM. More times than not, they're so bad, and it's so obvious, that I don't even end up past the initial phone call with them. It's SCARY!!! I have a journal where I blog all my "dates" and "experiences" with MM men. It reads like a comedy of errors, and it has a following because it's so amusing. I never use names or identifyng info on anyone though. -MLH
mental_traveller Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 I used one after my last serious relationship broke up. It worked pretty well, and I'd do it again if I was single.
Neptune Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 One of the referrals from the dating service talked pretty good on the phone. I got together with her.....went by her house. Well, she didn`t mention anything about her psycho ex boyfriend that used to live with her. And was stalking her. Until I got in the house. Then she was paranoid he was out there. And would see my car and go berserk. showed me the marks of things he had flung around in tantrums. And thought he might be out there with a gun. He liked guns. So when I walk outside I am waiting at any moment to get riddled with bullets.......bad night.
Outcast Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 Oh, Neptune! Even old coots should know you *never* go to a stranger's home for a first date!!!!
Lilly Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 I would like to read Alphamale's thread on online dating. Where can I find it?
Outcast Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 It's a bogus 'experiment' where he and another poster posted fake profiles to see what interest they got. Which only 'proves' that a couple hundred of the millions of people on that service are shallow.
JS17 Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 It's a bogus 'experiment' where he and another poster posted fake profiles to see what interest they got. Which only 'proves' that a couple hundred of the millions of people on that service are shallow. Kind of like how three matches 'proves" that a couple hundred of the millions of people on that service aren't shallow...or married for that matter?
alphamale Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 It's a bogus 'experiment' where he and another poster posted fake profiles to see what interest they got. it was not "bogus" OUTCAST....it was an empirical experiment with a control and it proved the following; 1) women go for looks even if the dude is dumb and a player 2) women repeated will go for looks even if the dude is dumb and a player 3) women don't particularly like "nice guys" unless they are also good looking and/or rich 4) online match-making services do work if you have particular qualities 5) people online with great looking pictures get the most interest and responses 6) there are a lot of dumb, naive and ignorant people online 7) a great looking stud can get laid at will and will have women throwing themselves at him regardless of his other qualities...
Outcast Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 It's a question of logic. It's illogical to think that a large dating service with a million or more members can be exclusively comprised of fake posts, liars, and freaks. The proportion of those might perhaps be slightly higher than that you'd encounter daily since some of the less desirable people don't venture out much but otherwise, those services will have a cross-section of humanity very similar to the one you'll find in your everyday life. it was an empirical experiment with a control Right. Then submit it to a peer-reviewed journal as such.
alphamale Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 Right. Then submit it to a peer-reviewed journal as such. the control was I posted another profile with exactly the same parameteres and verbage but it had no picture. that profile got minimal attention, actually....it got no emails, 10 views and no winks.
Outcast Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 I'll look for your authorative article in American Psychologist
manders_01 Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 the control was I posted another profile with exactly the same parameteres and verbage but it had no picture. that profile got minimal attention, actually....it got no emails, 10 views and no winks. The reason it probably got little response could be that when searching dating sites, you can elect not to see profiles that don't have pictures. Your "control" profile should have had the same verbage with a picture of a typically less attractive male.
alphamale Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 Your "control" profile should have had the same verbage with a picture of a typically less attractive male. would a pic of Bubbles the Chimp have worked?
Outcast Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 That still wouldn't work because you cannot guarantee that the same people looked at both profiles, nor can you control for any of the other variables in the situation. All this 'proves' is what's already been proven - that people prefer to look at profiles with photos. And even if it had a photo of a 'less attractive' person - attractiveness is still subjective so what Alpha may consider to be attractive others may not and vice versa. There's no science here.
manders_01 Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 There's no science here. Completely agree with that but I meant more for arguements sake in his "experiment". attractiveness is still subjective Agree again but since it's his "experiment" and he chose the original model, he should choose someone he thinks women would think is less attractive. would a pic of Bubbles the Chimp have worked Ummm, no. If I were conducting this "experiment", I would chose someone who I think women would typically find less attractive, but not someone who's at the complete other end of the spectrum (i.e. you chose a model for your first profile, someone more "run-of-the-mill" might be a good selection for your second profile).
Recommended Posts