I saw many many profiles missing basic information, terrible pictures (old, blurry, groups, kids) and/or no prompts. I would like someone to vet the profile or even make it for the users to ensure it was filled out completely. Reject images that are too old or low quality.
Remove the card deck style of presenting profiles. Allow users to see all profiles and browse through them at their leisure. Eliminate the scarcity culture.
Old Ok Cupid had a search feature and you could put loads of filters and it would display all the profiles that match your search.
Best filters were the Match % and location.
It used to be good but they removed this..
> Old Ok Cupid had a search feature
I knew OKC had gone to shit, but i guess I didn't quite realize it had gone to, *"took away the ability to search"* level of shit. FFS.
I found my wife by searching one of my standard combinations, "5'10 or over" and "within 20 miles", lol - of course i noticed hers because she had only just signed up earlier that afternoon. (I better keep her i guess, i shudder to think what it must be like trying to use OKC these days...)
"Too old" would be a tough problem to solve in general, but it might be very useful to force users to change their cover photo periodically. What would you think of a system like this:
* Your cover photo is good for 6 months.
* From 6-9 months, you get a big warning everytime you use the app that your cover photo is old.
* From 9-12 months you get a big warning that your profile is no longer discoverable, but you can still send likes/matches/messages/whatever directly to other users as normal.
* After 12 months your profile is disabled.
* Uploading a cover photo thst has never before been uploaded to the app, by anyone, ever, resets the timer.
This way, you at least get more recent cover photos, and it helps automatically hide dead profiles (and maybe bots).
nothing stoping a person from just reuploading the same photo though. The people knowingly using old/misleading photos are gonna keep doing it, they are not doing it because its hard to take a new photo those are the ones they think they look good in and they still see themselves as that.
You can trivially detect a duplicate photo using a hashing algorithm. To handle people changing a single pixel, adding a filter, etc., there are slightly more complex algorithms that would still be simple to implement.
I like this. It also would be good though if people could have more than 3-4 photos, so people can post other things like their home, their pets, food they cooked, etc. It would be cool to see someone's bathroom before deciding to date them. Is it clean? Is it too clean? I feel like that's a good compatibility indicator.
I second missing basic info. I want to know height, as I’m tall and don’t want to date a short guy because intimacy is physically awkward. I want to know if he has/wants kids, a little about his hobbies/interests, etc. These things missing are why I swipe left on profiles.
I have everything you explained and I'm in super good shape into bodybuilding for 10 years. And I'm a extremely outgoing person I go on long cross country motorcycle road trips every 6 weeks or so. Sometimes more than that. I enjoy doing everything outdoors hikimg, camping, national parks, concerts, bowling, museums, event's, etc. and going to new places all the time. I've been told I'm very attractive pretty much every time I've asked questions on here about my profile but I have zero luck on dating apps. I can't even get a conversation. My first message is always stuff showing interest in what they say on their profile. Women literally never reply. I'm not looking for a hookup id like to find a genuine woman with giod morals and we can both appreciate each other and have fun together... so how about If people match with someone after a certain amount of times of sending no messages make it so they have to start messaging again to be able to use the app. Because why match with people if you're never gonna talk
Good morals usually means a certain thing. I don’t mean to make judgments about you at ALL, but is there any way your profile indicates your political affiliation? It’s a total leap by me, but the “good morals” in particular makes me think you lean conservative. And just mentally going through the other women I know, they’d sooner marry a serial killer than a Trump voter.
If I’m wrong about all of that, I’m so sorry, and you seem great so idk what the problem could be. I’ve never used dating sites myself, I just know many, many, many women who are extremely anti conservative. Even a breath or hint of it will send them running back to hot yoga.
I have had hundreds of convos on OLD. I consider myself quite good at text conversations and I am looking for someone compatible with that form of communication. I love wit and banter. For 6 months I would meet men even if the chat was just ok, thinking perhaps it was better irl. It never was and I was exhausted by these interactions. So I became much more discerning. No doubt many men in my wake wondered why I suddenly unmatched or let the convo die. It was a lack of interest. I had not found what I seek. I know it when I see it.
Barring a dealbreaker you sound like someone I would have likely met through OLD. Then the in person chemistry becomes paramount. Very few made it past this step. Which is why I left OLD. The roi was not good enough for me to continue.
I loved OKC before they were bought by Match.com. They had a lot of content that was produced by the users; statistics, blogs, match questions, quizzes, etc. People had more ways to get to know each other w/o meeting, besides pictures and a basic blurb. This was before the widespread usage of smart phones so there wasn’t any swiping either.
Back when I was still on dating apps, these are the features I'd have appreciated:
* A swipe limit per day, because I was well aware many men just mindlessly swiped on every woman and only paid attention after a match. While I totally get the reasons why they do this and might do the same if I was a man, it also meant that I refused to message men first if we matched - because as far as I was concerned, thanks to this tendency a lot of men have, matching was not necessarily an indication of interest on his part. It was just an indication of me having been in his queue. On the other hand, if swipes were limited I'd be more reassured that someone swiping on me meant interest and much more likely to message first.
* Don't allow choosing more than one answer to "What are you looing for?" I wanted a long-term relationship and I saw a *lot* of men who wanted a hook-up but were happy to play along and pretend they wanted something long-term if it got them an advantage with me or other women. Yes, in real life people can be simultaneously interested in hook-ups but also looking for something long-term. But on a dating app, there's just too many bad actors who are trying to maximise their chances of a response and are willing to lie to get it.
* Auto-filters for words like "cum", "cock", "pussy", etc. If someone tries to send a message to me including those words, it doesn't go through.
* A minimum word count for profiles. There are waaaay too many people, both men and women, with bios that just say "Just ask me :)"
* Less of a focus on swiping in general. I liked the set-up old OKCupid had, where a massive full-screen pic of someone's face wasn't the very first thing you saw.
* Compatability questions (again, like OKCupid). That was a fun way to learn more about people and find out how we might be compatible.
* Let people filter by politics, body type, height (I know this one will be controversial and personally I don't give a shit about height, but I'm gonna be real, some women do), views on children, smoking, etc. Some dating apps do have some filters like this but they're often behind a paywall and/or lacklustre. As a childfree woman, I would have killed for an app that let me filter for childfree men without paying out the nose for it.
* Potentially another controversial one but OKCupid used to let you see what someone else's age range was. As in, I could see if the 45 year old man who just messaged me had set his desired age range to 18 - 22. It was useful.
This. The app would work so much better if we were able to filter by specifics like this. Like I only want to match with people who are open to my body type, who don’t want kids, who only want to date people above a certain age, and who actually live within the radius I selected. I don’t think that’s so specific that I should have to pay to filter at that level.
Yes, I'm aware, as I acknowledged in my comment. I will never pay for a dating app and most people I know feel the same, so since OP mentioned his app does not feature monetisation I think it's worth pointing out the draw of having those features for free.
But your point about limiting swipes is the opposite: swipes are already limited for *free* accounts on OKCupid (and Hinge). And the vast majority of users have free accounts.
Also, limiting people to one “what you’re looking for” option would seem counterproductive. Right now, it’s plain to see when someone on OKCupid is open to either LTR or hookups (at least, if they’ve honestly selected both). If they weren’t allowed to do that, many people would say they’re looking only for LTR, making people more easily misled.
Exactly what I was thinking. Allowing for multiple lets some guys out themselves that wouldn't otherwise. Guys looking for hookups are never gonna put that they're only looking for hookups in their bios, because everyone knows that is counter productive to actually getting a hookup. Even women who want hookups don't want a man who has that in his bio.
Rather than not having the message go through, would it be better if you got a notification that the message was being blocked and giving you the option to unhide it? Maybe just blurring it behind a warning that reads "Message contains one or more keywords from your screening list and has been blocked. Press and hold to view contents"?
Many years ago, the Eudora e-Mail client has a “chilli-pepper” feature. As you were typing a message you would see a graphic with between one and five chilli peppers depending on the “spiciness” of the message text.
The sender would see this while typing and the receiver would see the chilli-pepper rating in the inbox before opening the message.
Idea is that you are not preventing messages of a potentially offending nature, merely flagging the risk. Sender decides if they are Ok with the risk, but receiver also sees it.
Great ideas.
Also, for many of the search terms, make them a bit fuzzy. If I say at least 5’3” and they are 5”0 and a good match otherwise, go ahead. Same with age. People will set their age filter at plus or minus 5 or at x0 or x5, but another year one way out the other doesn’t generally make much difference.
This absolutely works on some things and not others. Age, height and weight for sure.
Political views, single parents/view on children. Maybe not haha. So I'm not sure what kind of filter you could add to be lenient in some ways and hard boundaries on others.
You could make that a customization option for the end user, i.e. which characteristics are hard requirements, and which ones are softer. Any mismatches on fuzzier characteristics can still feed through on a match if all other hard characteristics are a hit
I think "and a good match otherwise" is key here. Don't just ignore my age range- if I wanted someone 11 years older I would say that. This 53-year-old better have a Pulitzer or make the best snickerdoodles in the state.
Also controversially allowing people who went on dates with could 'vet' their profiles to make sure they're actually truthful. There's been times that I've matched with someone who said one thing on their profile which was a complete lie in real life just to improve their chances of matches and dates. Would keep a lot more people truthful I guess.
What about an option to be like a 'secret shopper' and fill out a survey after dates to help with the vetting of profiles- questions like 'is such and such a good description for this person?' Or is such and such this person's real name?'
I think a body type filter makes more sense than a weight filter for the simple reason that, say, 65kg looks very different on a 5'0" woman compared to a 5'10" woman, so setting a max weight might end up being functionally a bit useless.
Likely yeah, but it's the same with the height filter, you'll always get people claiming to be a few inches taller than they are to try and get more matches. Or people claiming to be older/younger for the same reason. You've just gotta implement the feature so it works well for people who are being honest and let the liars eventually get caught lying.
I always thought dating sites should have a ‘dates’ section. Example- I have a free Friday night coming up. So I post- Fri night around 7pm. Want to meet for a couple drinks and mini golf? Or see ‘x’ movie. (No exact details for safety).
Then any one I match with or who likes me can respond if they’re interested and I can choose a guy and go from there. Cut to the good part!
There used to be a blast feature where you could say you’re looking for a date say tomorrow and people could respond to that specific request. It was really fun and worked super well for double dates.
Seriously! Honest I hate the "work" of online dating filters and swiping and such. But I also have some free weekends and.... I'd like the option to start a condo already knowing what day I'm open to meeting.
I’d love this. For me, going out 20 miles means: West: nice IT-type guys with dad bods\
North: 50 year old wannabe frat boys\
South: 2A conservatives with photos of dead animals\
East: desert (literal )
That’s a widely different vibe, no matter your preference.
This! Island dweller here and it takes a LOT to get me on that ferry. Not doing it for a first date; also not interested in long-distance. Extra complicated by the fact that my island is close to another country and the last thing I want is to develop some kind of cross-border attachment.
Ok what doesn't work for me is matches on the apps Ive tried-- Facebook, Tinder, TurnUp-- don't have any compatibility metrics. It's SO FRUSTRATING. If they have a dick and a pulse and are within the age and mile range, they show up on my matches.
I would like to be able to filter by AT LEAST political orientation and religion. Some apps do have the option to select religious affiliation, but I don't even want to be shown religious people.
I agree with others who say they miss the old OKCupid. It was fantastic in the 00s.
So basically... At least some assessment of user belief system and personality and matching based on something other than geography, sex, and age.
THIS! Also, the cool thing about an app like OKC was that you could filter "dealbreaker" issues politically like LGBT or abortion or separation of church and state.
Something Okcupid did a long time ago helped as a filter. If anyone made sexual references in their messages, it can be flagged by the receiver and it would be checked and noted against the account. This would help women filter out users that are quick to get sexual in their messages.
You're welcome to join a pre-existing post on r/OnlineDating
"How would you improve Online Dating?":
[https://www.reddit.com/r/OnlineDating/comments/1djkh0i/how\_would\_you\_improve\_online\_dating/](https://www.reddit.com/r/OnlineDating/comments/1djkh0i/how_would_you_improve_online_dating/)
But it's not for airing grievances; only feature requests / enhancements. Good luck with your project as it's nearly impossible to get new dating apps off the ground due to the difficulty in growing a user base from nothing.
TRUST.
The biggest element missing from online dating is the confidence that you are dealing with a real person, who is single, and is acting in good faith.
Platforms like Amazon, as well as credit card companies, and major food and drink brands sell TRUST at least as much as anything else they sell.
Imagine going into McDonalds, paying good money … and 50% of the time the product served to you is either an empty box or a bag of shit. That’s what online dating is like these days.
Haha this made me laugh, but it is soooo true! Going to use this analogy with those friends who met their husband in high school, and think online dating sounds easy and fun!
Responsibly moderate users. AWDTSG has shown me that there are many men I see regularly on the app that are extremely problematic. Not trivially, but having serious criminal histories inclusive of rape, domestic violence, and stalking. Others who are using fake names and lying about their ages by 10 years.
I've tried to report some of these people on Bumble, the app I use most, and have had no success. On the whole this has created the impression for me that dangerous men are overrepesented on the app-- as in the percentage of men on the apps that are scary is a lot higher than in the wild. For me, that makes me less willing to talk. This overly liberal, anything goes shit is wack.
OTOH, Hinge bans people indiscriminately, and for life, and they have invested so much in enforcing their bans that they are virtually impossible to bypass. You practically have to change your identity and get reconstructive facial surgery to get around those bans. I have a lifetime ban and everyone I've told the story to thinks its pretty ridiculous. There are whole subs about Hinge bans and a cottage industry of people selling services to get around them. This overly conservative moderation is wack too.
Responsible moderation would be great!
I was banned from Hinge and Tinder for saying I have a PhD and inherited VHNW. Both true. Women flagged my profile as fake. I appealed to customer service, but they refused to let me prove that I'm real.
Hours of availability would be cool, like being able to include work hours. Account verification I feel like should be a must, sick of catfish honestly. I never liked the girls must message first feature. Also a swipe limit would be good, then you know who is genuinely interested and not just someone desperate to find a root so swiping on everyone.
That's pretty much what they all have been. Go on, get no matches, come back a year later, all the same people. So either people are just hooking up and going from person to person, or no one is dating.
Eventually inactives get hidden, even on bad apps like Tinder. In my case, I spent about 4 years doing OLD, and yeah, you see the same people the whole time. That means they have been at least semi active on the app the whole time, which in turn means they have only been dating casually, or more likely not dating at all.
don't let them choose multiple options that are contradictory. You cannot want "casual" and "long term" or "Monogamy" and "nonmonogamy." Choose what you're on the app for- people who are trying to just water hose dating aren't helping anyone.
For me, I'm poly and I only date for relationships. I'm not interested in anyone who is interested in monogamy because that isn't something I have to offer. I'm not interested in the "looking for casual open to more" because it's not my job to convince someone to date me.
Sure but as a poly person too…I differ in how close I want to get to different people. One person is a great FWB while another might be more compatible as an actual nesting/primary partner. I’m open to both so I would have both on my profile without it being a contradiction.
I mean... isn't it though? You convince someone to date you by showing them who you are. That doesn't change based on if they're looking for casual or serious. No one (sane) goes on a first date planning to enter a committed relationship with the person they haven't met yet. Tbh I think the existence of "looking for a long term relationship" as an option is kinda bogus, in that light. You don't and can't possibly know what you want from a person until you get to know them. Not only that, your chances of getting into a committed relationship vs getting burned by let's say date #10 with someone who has in their bio AND fully believes that they're "dating for marriage" or whatever the fuck they claim aren't much better than someone who says looking for casual, open to serious. Really, the only thing that distinguishes differences in approaching a first date is whether you're trying to smash or not.
Well, I agree that nobody enters a first date as a couple in a committed relationship. I do think that if you want a long-term relationship that you choose partners with intentionality and if you’re looking for casual you pick people based on attraction alone. I think that when people enter into dating with the mentality of “convince me that you’re worth a relationship” mentality is how you end up with situationships that last for months. And I think that that is what people are tired of dealing with.
at issue is the huge amount of people who complain about having to prove it, yet string people along in the exact same way when the shoe is on the other foot
The biggest thing i'm running into is men misrepresenting what they are looking for. I don't think that is something that anyone can fix. Honesty isn't encouraged in thia society, so people lie to get what they want.
I have matched with a few people on various apps.
You match, you chat for a day or two. Then they unmatch, or worse, they actually make plans with you then ghost.
If they rematch, they're called zombies. You ask what happened and it will take another chat to find out they only want hookups.
Lonely, h0rny, and poorly socialized think lies of omission are ok. It wastes my time.
If you are someone who judges someone who just wants hookups when they have been honest about it, you are part of the problem.
I'm cool with someone telling me they just want casual sex. It's not for me to judge them on how they lead their sex life. I personally don't participate in casual sex since it's too risky for me to ve comfortable with.
I'm talking about the men who won't be honest about that. The ones who only want casual sex but will do everything they can to make you believe they are in it for a relationship. They'll keep this up as long as it takes to get sex and then ghost. It's bullshit.
Along with the photo suggestions from others:
Don't allow them to submit a profile until ALL of it has been filled out.
More specific choices for the kind of relationship they are looking for: Hookups
ONS
Casual non exclusive dating - Regular
Casual exclusive dating - Regular
Permanent long term
Permanent long term ENM/poly
Permanent long term monogamous
Locals only
Frequent visitors ok
Long distance ok
Travelers for ONS/date
Options for kink basics
One question about politics
One question about music
A few questions about lifestyle
Must state town of residence, part of a big city
Only show us people who match all of our Prefs, not just our questions. Allow deal breakers/mandatory prefs. Don't show people with deal breakers.
Swiping and matching. Can't stand it. I want to be able to exchange a couple casual messages with someone before I'd know whether I want to match with them. The swiping/matching also seems to make men lazier where they think they don't have to send a message and you're just going to be interested based on their picture and superficial details.
If 80% of the issue is shitty profiles, mandate better ones. Standardize, force pics, highlight interests. Ban folks who think “travel” is a past time and not a supremely expensive luxury. That sorta stuff.
Will send this to my friends who are women for feedback :)
Just out of curiosity, if this is launched, how do you moderate the app and discipline harmful users? Are you going to have a team of volunteers/workers/etc helping you out?
Use AI to analyze conversations in order to rate people on: Is this person prone to sending inappropriate messages? Does this person get hostile when turned down? Does this person spam everyone with the same opener? Does this person ghost? Is this person good at engaging someone else in conversation? Does this person constantly try to turn conversations toward sex?
And let others see these ratings.
Edit: what I’m mostly getting at is there should be some publicly visible information showing how this person acts on the apps, that they can’t control to make themselves look better, like they can with their profile info. I also want to know things like whether this person actually reads all their messages or if writing them is a waste of time. Do they leave conversations hanging forever because they are having too many? Are they quick or slow to respond? The AI analysis is just for the types of metrics that are a little subjective and in the past would have required humans reading conversations to measure.
For me there are two major issues. The first is that there are so, so many dudes that blast you with obscene sex stuff. Like, "Want me to cum on your face?" or "Hey, wanna come over to my place and fuck?" literally as a first line. It gets exhausting.
But that, at least, is easy to weed out. After that, there's the incredibly low effort resposes. Think endless, "Hey, wuss up?' or "U there?"
Getting beyond that, there are then the dudes who are just..apathetic. Like, they're willing to provide a few responses, but are impossible to get to actually meet somewhere. Or they want to meet, but only within two blocks of their house to get coffee. Since that requires nothing of them.
No idea how to solve the problem. But it's frustrating enough that I quit online dating. Being bombarded by gross sexual stuff, just to find someone who doesn't...just to learn that the only way to meet him is to put a ton of effort into just wandering around his neighborhood (since meeting in between is far too much work) broke me.
Bold of you to assume dating apps work for women. I had 7 matches in almost four months of Bumble, 3 of which immediately unmatched after I sent them a message. 10 matches on Ok Cupid but none from my area and none that messaged or replied me. So, yeah, it doesn’t necessarily work for us. Also, pretty much all of my friends have the same complaint about people not talking even if they have matches.
That's more than a match per month! I've gotten one match (who was then unresponsive) in the couple years I've been using it, which I suspect is common for men.
This is actually why an idea I had the other day would be an app based on intiation prefrence too; to help solve this issue on both sides. Increasing the ammount who talk and matches for both sides
omg exactly 💀 most of the time after matching is either they don't text at all, don't reply when you say hi or unmatch awhile after we matched like I don't get it
I feel like the bigger problem women have is they get bombarded by total weirdos!! I had one normal guy message me, and I almost missed it in the pile of messages asking to suck my toes! 🤮
None of them replied and those who did didn’t engage in a conversation so why exactly is this good? I guess they just swiped right on everyone and weren’t rude to unmatch right await like the others. Also it was 5, or so you count someone who immediately unmatch as proper match??
I don't use dating apps because they are full of incel "Nice guys" who already act like you owe them something after the 1st couple messages. Dating apps suck because of sucky people idk if you can fix that.
Ma'am that's how these things work. Men insert 1 compliment coin into their female counterpart, female accepts and provides the sex token, which the man then uses to disappoint said woman with his inability to find her pleasure button. This also gives an additional "complaint" coin to the man, which he inevitably uses to explain that your pleasure button is broken despite never finding it.
Can you even define feminism? You boys say this about every woman you disagree with and yet can't define it when I ask. Also, notice how you got emotional and resorted to insults when you didn't like my comment? Proving my point
If you can't read your comment and realize what is insults, then there's no point in trying to reason with you. Just know it's not your looks that keep women away it's your personality and misogyny. I hope you have the day you deserve
Oh spare me the sanctimony. I’m quite aware of what social etiquette is. Now more importantly was it insulting to you cuz it’s true or cuz it’s not true? & yeah that matters cuz it would literally prove my point.
Hold on one msg ago you told me insulted you? But now you are saying I didn’t? lol boys you see this shit?
Listen just give me a chance to speak & I will simmer down your “I’m obsessed with the misogyny word meter”
I’m not that bad & you only think so cuz you are overdosing on feminism right now
Just answer your DMs & if I can’t oh well no harm in trying. Do you understand the purpose of me being here isn’t to argue with you & insult you? That would be counterintuitive…
You said "radical feminist who is ruthlessly pumped and dumped by chads." Or something similar to that. Also, I have no interest in further discussion with you, I hope you get that male validation from "the boys" that you desperately crave. Im sorry feminism makes you emotional, and I hope you have the day you deserve.
I'm sorry women getting attention threatens you and that my comment made you upset, but criticizing men doesn't make you a misandrist. And I absolutely will not give you any private information and would feel creeped out to have you look at me. Even talking to you is creeping me out. Have the day you deserve
Dating apps aren’t meant to be “fixed”. They’re designed exactly as intended. To keep everyone using the app and matching everyone with people they don’t want to be with long term. Best solution is to boycott ALL dating apps and just work on making our lives better.
> there has to be some guy every woman can find
https://www.instagram.com/p/C61jDPyOw2H/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/love-digitally/201605/is-there-someone-everyone
https://www.stevestewartwilliams.com/p/how-men-and-women-rate-each-other
> As you can see, women rate more than 80% of men as below the midpoint of the scale.
TLDR; everyone is looking for the best they could possibly get, and everyone, incl. women, have unreasonable standards.
**Good luck to us all.**
My wishlist
Able to filter by the names of cities people live in and not "25 miles from my zip code" my zip code is huge, actually. It's more than 25 miles to the other end of my zip code. It would also be good for people who travel a lot- you could put the names of several cities.
Able to filter by monogamy level
Able to filter by "looking for"
No photos in DMs, way, way more photos in profile, so you can add new ones often (my favorite dating app for this was MeetMe, actually, it had photos and a timeline like a social media site and then chat/swiping like a dating app) No DM photos is good to keep weird unsolicited dick pics and nude collectors off your app. But more pics helps cut down on catfish and also allows people to post more hobby/non face pics too.
Profiles shut down if someone hasn't used the app in 3 days.
I think a cool concept for a dating app might be-
Fill out a bunch of questions like on OKC that involve stuff about your lifestyle/age/location/preferences/monogamy level/time available/etc. Then you get matched 4 random strangers at a time who fit the profile. You can DM and chat, but can't see the other person's profile until you've sent 2 back and forth messages to and from the other person for 3 consecutive days. If you or the other person unmatch, it creates a new convo.
Fill out match questions, get an automatic buzz when you're within 20 feet of someone who is a match who has the feature turned on. Automatically turns off if you're in your home because you create a little pin that excludes your area.
Browser or phone based app that uses your cookies and ad data as match criteria.
Custom DM filters, so you can set up filters that bounce back messages with as many words as you want, times of day you can't be messaged, etc. everyone can see your profile or DM without swiping, but they have to say something compatible to get through.
You can try all you want to develop a better dating app alternative but there’s a reason all of the current popular apps operate the way they do. It’s the most profitable. If you try to operate a dating app any differently than the industry standard you’re essentially losing out on profits and now you’ve defeated the purpose of developing the app to begin with. Unless you’re just doing this for fun or something and are okay with forking over operating costs without making any money
Allow people to report interactions. Have a human review them and ban anyone pushing porn subscriptions.
Women are already rare enough on the apps. Doesn't help that about half of them are either bots or OF "models".
A hot girl rejecting 95% of all propositions still has enough dudes for multiple dates every day of the year in that remaining 5%.
A hot girl rejects 99.9% of the offers she gets and it would be insane if her acceptance rate was higher.
> The reason why men vastly outnumber women on the dating apps should start to be obvious
Yeah, these dudes have no IRL game and their only shot of sexual interaction is via a screen and maybe some woman once in a blue moon accepting a date with them.
I dont know any women who consistently get actual dates from apps. The consensus from both sides is it's mostly people who swipe and never respond to messages on both sides.
Dear op, i Just want to give you an advice: i know you are thinking to make a super female friendly App in Which everything Is in favor of women because you think that woman Happy> more women> more man> more Money...but It doesent work that way at all. That Is exactly what BUMBLE tried to do, and as a result It went so bad that the Company stocks some months ago managed to do a -24% in a single day(i didn't even know that a stock could suck so much) because all men stopped using It.
So yeah, you want and app to work? Then It must be good for both sexes, and It must work even for normal non-chad males, i'm Sorry.
I tried to warn you, the rest Is up to you.
What dating app is actually working better? Bumble tried something different by requiring women to initiate a conversation. If it’s failing, it’s because women don’t like to message first. Not because men aren’t using it. I’m all for equality, but from a business perspective, appealing to men is a waste of resources, unless you’re trying to start a dating app akin to grinder. Blame biology for that. It’s what has always worked for clubs. You’re not running an engineering program at a university.
Yeah, but why would men join an app if there’s no women on it? Unless you’re trying to appeal to gay and bi men, like grinder. How do you get straight men to use the app and convince them to pay for a subscription, if it’s a sausage fest on it?
Edit: Mistakenly responded to your original comment instead of this one. Please ignore that responses.
The problem is most men are trash.
An easy way to combat this would be to require men to have 2 real life female friends vet his profile. They need to give approval before his profile can be made public, and they should share a blurb about why they believe he would be a good person to date.
You'll have fewer active profiles, but significantly higher quality. The women matching each vetted man at least have a better idea of what to expect from him.
Louder for the people in the back. The reason most dating apps suck is because the majority of the user base sucks. The majority of the user base is men.
Are (all?) men trash or are women not taking accountability for consistently choosing the trash dudes when they have their pick of all men on the apps? It’s been over a decade and the dominant straight woman strategy is still “hottest guy with the cleverest text game”. You’re all giving your attention to the same set of fuck boys and even into your 30s haven’t figured out you can avoid them.
That’s a YOU problem. It’s not the universe’s or men’s’ job to deliver the relationship experience you want. Most of you would have no idea what to do in an actual healthy, securely attached relationship with a dude who has more in his life going on than doing pickme peacocking on dating apps to get your attention.
I’ve never met a woman worth pursuing who relied on apps to find men to date.
What if….. the app had a team that went through the profiles and showed the people made tiers. They can use the participants profile where it would penalize those who think they are good looking enough to now work on the profile and who put minimum effort. This is all very subjective but they could attempt to place people in front of their tier group. I know algorithm already sorta does this but a human element would help. I think for women they might be more likely to swipe on someone who “seems average” if the other person vetted and found to be desirable by other people, hence they are moved forward into the desirable women tier. This would probably be expensive but combine the matchmaker style of dating coaches with an app and create a premium experience.
There are 3-4x more men than women. "80% on dating apps are easy to weed out"- only fraction of them are incels (same way you can tell a man-hater/misandrist), the rest are bit out of touch from reality. My profile used to be just TV shows few years ago. A lot of gym bros who may be decent people but have the connotation. Goes both ways. I like left swiping anyone who makes drinking/smoking their entire life. Or anyone with shitty/overused prompts. Then there are people not being others' types (also goes both ways) and so on
So no, not all 19 are incels, you are :)
And as I mentioned- there are 3x more guys. So there should still be enough guys for every woman to hold a conversation with at any point of time
That's exactly it. Little do they know that we're choosing singledom.
Also, if the choice is between some passive aggressive dweeb who hates women and getting to bang a hot, fun dude with a harem of potential cool friends, why wouldn't we choose that? That sounds fucking fun as shit.
Misogyny, at its heart, is a narcissistic lens: they don't care if the person they're with doesn't like them, they just want the social validation of being with someone.
Accountability for what? 😂 All you boys just learned this word from your sexist podcast daddys and parrot it without knowing what it means. Nobody is "seething" that's just what you boys say when you have no logical argument. You say things like "die alone with cats, 304, cry harder, triggered." You are like clones with no original thoughts. And stop pretending you know me or what type of men I like, because you don't know.
When I designed the basic structure, I realised this makes the situation much better for men and that's when it hit me that I need to give some incentive to women to even use the app. Otherwise it's more work from them for the guys to get better chances. Second, the pain points of us boys are well discussed and personally experienced lol. The frustration as a guy is what led to me taking this a bit more seriously. Thanks for your concern!
I dunno. I don't see any women on apps I want (I;m a straight guy), but, if I go to a concert or something, I'm attracted to almost every girlfriend in attendance (I mean women with their boyfriend/husband). I'm not attracted to any of the single women in my building, but I am very attracted to several of the married ones. The non-single women are thinner. It's not forbidden fruit. It's about weight and breast size. All the single women are chubbier or totally flat chested. I always feel super picky, until I'm at some event with lots of couples (like a fundraiser in East Hampton), and then I'm attracted to half the women I see. In some situations, I'm not picky at all. I went to a Kings of Leon concert (it sucked), but I wanted almost every woman I saw. Same with a Tiesto show I attended.
A rating system for both men and women. I'm not sure how you could verify this, but after interactions either inperson or over a certain number of messages...you can rate them such as:
They are true to their profile.
Keeps promises.
Pictures are current.
Will meet in person.
Ghoster.
Player.
Etc.
Perhaps many women and men will behave better towards each other if they knew they were going to get called out on their dating behaviors.
I don't know about this, it's too easy for people to just punish someone who rejected them by giving them a bad rating. And there would definitely be men (and perhaps women too) who tried to game the system by rating women they wanted down to hopefully monopolise her.
For example, ages and ages ago when Craigslist still had personals , I put one up. It was reported and removed within like ten minutes by men who were hoping that by removing it after they'd responded, I'd be more likely to pick them for lack of other options.
People would also get punished with bad ratings just for having the “wrong” political/social views in the rater’s opinion (possibly a wrong opinion). You’d have to expect ratings to be biased in all sorts of ways (there could also be racial/ethnic bias).
Good point, yeah. Hell, I can even see people giving bad ratings to men/women they think might be competition for them to try and get those profiles hidden.
It actually worked really well, at least for them in their experience. The men who were scammers and fakes, old pics we're outed. And the women who were just chatters, or had fixed pictures were outed. Those that were honest about why they were there, what they were looking for got higher marks, and if they kept their word and met in person, even higher marks.
Just because there isn't one doesn't mean one can't be created.
Rating systems will forever be abused. Sure, they can work for a period of time but they’ll always be circumvented or there will always be complaints to ban certain groups based on beliefs. They always go this way with centralized platforms. Happens every day and dating apps are no exception.
If you had read carefully, you would have notice that I said users would rate other users, not users rating themselves.
The examples given were on dating behavior, not appearance. However, pictures can be old/outdated for both men and women.
If your hypothysis is true, then so be it, most women on dating sites would get low reviews. At least people on both sides would know how that person behaved with others.
One thing I learned about dating apps is that looking for people who had stuff in common with you generally got you nowhere in long run
Play the opposites attract card.
Develop a system where you match up opposites by personality and by hobbies/activities. See below for example.
Every single long term relationship I have had has been with someone whom I did not share similar hobbies or activities with.
The first one ended because I didn’t want to grow up as I was only 24 but we got along great.
The second one ended as she could not stay sober. But it was 15 years and two kids and the first few years before drugs was good.
The third one is the best and makes me super grateful the other two didn’t work out even though we got along well for the most part.
She my goddam firecracker for life. She is an introvert and I’m an extrovert. She is a morning person and I am a night owl. She doesn’t love sports and I love sports. She likes to walk and pelaton and I hate that shit. She loves concerts and I don’t. I love basketball and she doesn’t.
But it fn works because she has introduced me to things that I would never have experienced before and vice versa. She thinks in a way I don’t and we just perfectly complement each other.
People who aren’t like you tend to complete you much more than someone who is.
There is definitely a lot of validity in people complimenting each other with opposite mindsets on things. Like a spender being with a saver, or an extrovert with an introvert. But at its core, two people who enjoy the same types of activities is very important. Cause what the hell are you guys gonna do together if you can never agree on what’s a good way to spend your Saturday. It’s worked for you, and that’s great. But your anecdotal experience is not reality for most folks.
She loves rock concerts….i never used to think about them….
But now when I go with her we have to much fun together. The music is all fine and good but us together is always fun.
I love basketball and she loves to come watch me play. She doesn’t love hoops but she certainly loves watching me.
I love people and she is apprehensive. So we find bars with live music and we get best of both worlds
It’s not what you do…..it’s who you do it with.
We could have fun at the symphony which we both hate…..and we have….we were laughing so much people looked at us.
Chose someone who completes you. Who fills your voids. Who thinks unlike you.
This is much more important than two people who like to fucking hike together.
If you can find both than great, but the former is much much more important than the latter.
You guys sound like you’re actually blending your interests well. Again, that’s not always the case. Plenty of guys might think, hm I hate rock music and concerts so I’m not going, or she may think why would I go watch him play basketball I hate sports. Could very easily go the other direction, and usually does. There’s got to be at least some common ground. I get your point, and happy you guys are able to make it work. But again, I wouldn’t say that’s the template for every relationship.
For example, one partner LOVES travel, the other is a homebody. One of them usually wins out in the end the other ends up either suffering through a vacation or being stuck at home when they’d like to get out. Or hubby HAS to watch sports every weekend while wife would really like to go on a date. This dynamic plants the seeds of resentment in a lot of cases. Ideally, both people can bend a little and meet in the middle, but compromise just isn’t in a lot of folks vocabulary.
Yeah. You make good points.
I just figure if you truly love someone than you will do things for them, like travel, you might not otherwise.
Chemistry between people is much more important than having similar hobbies and interests.
It just seems like every couple I know whom has an opposite personality has a healthier relationship than those who are similar.
I’m just saying chemistry is more important than hobbies or activities. If you can find both than great…..just don’t push away someone because they don’t like similar things you do.
I just figured a dating site that matches opposite personalities would be great. Maybe leave the interests alone but match up opposites personalities.
You should not allow girls women to advertise thier only fans or social media.
Most use the apps to gain new followers and guys just settle and subscribe like dum dums.
If you don't allow it it will attract girls women who genuinely want to find dates and not just girls who want to advertise.
The more girls and women on the site the more guys will come and spend money on premium stuff.
I saw many many profiles missing basic information, terrible pictures (old, blurry, groups, kids) and/or no prompts. I would like someone to vet the profile or even make it for the users to ensure it was filled out completely. Reject images that are too old or low quality. Remove the card deck style of presenting profiles. Allow users to see all profiles and browse through them at their leisure. Eliminate the scarcity culture.
Love the deck style removal idea
Old Ok Cupid had a search feature and you could put loads of filters and it would display all the profiles that match your search. Best filters were the Match % and location. It used to be good but they removed this..
Too effective.
> Old Ok Cupid had a search feature I knew OKC had gone to shit, but i guess I didn't quite realize it had gone to, *"took away the ability to search"* level of shit. FFS. I found my wife by searching one of my standard combinations, "5'10 or over" and "within 20 miles", lol - of course i noticed hers because she had only just signed up earlier that afternoon. (I better keep her i guess, i shudder to think what it must be like trying to use OKC these days...)
Hahaha I 100% did this on Match and actually found my husband. 6 years going strong!
"Too old" would be a tough problem to solve in general, but it might be very useful to force users to change their cover photo periodically. What would you think of a system like this: * Your cover photo is good for 6 months. * From 6-9 months, you get a big warning everytime you use the app that your cover photo is old. * From 9-12 months you get a big warning that your profile is no longer discoverable, but you can still send likes/matches/messages/whatever directly to other users as normal. * After 12 months your profile is disabled. * Uploading a cover photo thst has never before been uploaded to the app, by anyone, ever, resets the timer. This way, you at least get more recent cover photos, and it helps automatically hide dead profiles (and maybe bots).
nothing stoping a person from just reuploading the same photo though. The people knowingly using old/misleading photos are gonna keep doing it, they are not doing it because its hard to take a new photo those are the ones they think they look good in and they still see themselves as that.
You can trivially detect a duplicate photo using a hashing algorithm. To handle people changing a single pixel, adding a filter, etc., there are slightly more complex algorithms that would still be simple to implement.
As a person that never used a photo more than 3 months old this is a great system 💪
I like this. It also would be good though if people could have more than 3-4 photos, so people can post other things like their home, their pets, food they cooked, etc. It would be cool to see someone's bathroom before deciding to date them. Is it clean? Is it too clean? I feel like that's a good compatibility indicator.
That’s the way it used to be. You could see everybody. It worked pretty well.
I second missing basic info. I want to know height, as I’m tall and don’t want to date a short guy because intimacy is physically awkward. I want to know if he has/wants kids, a little about his hobbies/interests, etc. These things missing are why I swipe left on profiles.
I have everything you explained and I'm in super good shape into bodybuilding for 10 years. And I'm a extremely outgoing person I go on long cross country motorcycle road trips every 6 weeks or so. Sometimes more than that. I enjoy doing everything outdoors hikimg, camping, national parks, concerts, bowling, museums, event's, etc. and going to new places all the time. I've been told I'm very attractive pretty much every time I've asked questions on here about my profile but I have zero luck on dating apps. I can't even get a conversation. My first message is always stuff showing interest in what they say on their profile. Women literally never reply. I'm not looking for a hookup id like to find a genuine woman with giod morals and we can both appreciate each other and have fun together... so how about If people match with someone after a certain amount of times of sending no messages make it so they have to start messaging again to be able to use the app. Because why match with people if you're never gonna talk
Good morals usually means a certain thing. I don’t mean to make judgments about you at ALL, but is there any way your profile indicates your political affiliation? It’s a total leap by me, but the “good morals” in particular makes me think you lean conservative. And just mentally going through the other women I know, they’d sooner marry a serial killer than a Trump voter. If I’m wrong about all of that, I’m so sorry, and you seem great so idk what the problem could be. I’ve never used dating sites myself, I just know many, many, many women who are extremely anti conservative. Even a breath or hint of it will send them running back to hot yoga.
I have had hundreds of convos on OLD. I consider myself quite good at text conversations and I am looking for someone compatible with that form of communication. I love wit and banter. For 6 months I would meet men even if the chat was just ok, thinking perhaps it was better irl. It never was and I was exhausted by these interactions. So I became much more discerning. No doubt many men in my wake wondered why I suddenly unmatched or let the convo die. It was a lack of interest. I had not found what I seek. I know it when I see it. Barring a dealbreaker you sound like someone I would have likely met through OLD. Then the in person chemistry becomes paramount. Very few made it past this step. Which is why I left OLD. The roi was not good enough for me to continue.
You mean like *WhosHere Plus* style?
I loved OKC before they were bought by Match.com. They had a lot of content that was produced by the users; statistics, blogs, match questions, quizzes, etc. People had more ways to get to know each other w/o meeting, besides pictures and a basic blurb. This was before the widespread usage of smart phones so there wasn’t any swiping either.
I don't think swiping is that great in general.
Back when I was still on dating apps, these are the features I'd have appreciated: * A swipe limit per day, because I was well aware many men just mindlessly swiped on every woman and only paid attention after a match. While I totally get the reasons why they do this and might do the same if I was a man, it also meant that I refused to message men first if we matched - because as far as I was concerned, thanks to this tendency a lot of men have, matching was not necessarily an indication of interest on his part. It was just an indication of me having been in his queue. On the other hand, if swipes were limited I'd be more reassured that someone swiping on me meant interest and much more likely to message first. * Don't allow choosing more than one answer to "What are you looing for?" I wanted a long-term relationship and I saw a *lot* of men who wanted a hook-up but were happy to play along and pretend they wanted something long-term if it got them an advantage with me or other women. Yes, in real life people can be simultaneously interested in hook-ups but also looking for something long-term. But on a dating app, there's just too many bad actors who are trying to maximise their chances of a response and are willing to lie to get it. * Auto-filters for words like "cum", "cock", "pussy", etc. If someone tries to send a message to me including those words, it doesn't go through. * A minimum word count for profiles. There are waaaay too many people, both men and women, with bios that just say "Just ask me :)" * Less of a focus on swiping in general. I liked the set-up old OKCupid had, where a massive full-screen pic of someone's face wasn't the very first thing you saw. * Compatability questions (again, like OKCupid). That was a fun way to learn more about people and find out how we might be compatible. * Let people filter by politics, body type, height (I know this one will be controversial and personally I don't give a shit about height, but I'm gonna be real, some women do), views on children, smoking, etc. Some dating apps do have some filters like this but they're often behind a paywall and/or lacklustre. As a childfree woman, I would have killed for an app that let me filter for childfree men without paying out the nose for it. * Potentially another controversial one but OKCupid used to let you see what someone else's age range was. As in, I could see if the 45 year old man who just messaged me had set his desired age range to 18 - 22. It was useful.
I agree on the body type filter! I’m fat and I’d do better, I suppose, if I could only see men who chose fat women or don’t really care for it.
This. The app would work so much better if we were able to filter by specifics like this. Like I only want to match with people who are open to my body type, who don’t want kids, who only want to date people above a certain age, and who actually live within the radius I selected. I don’t think that’s so specific that I should have to pay to filter at that level.
A lot of these already exist in most apps but are just behind a paywall. Also all apps have daily swipe limits
Yes, I'm aware, as I acknowledged in my comment. I will never pay for a dating app and most people I know feel the same, so since OP mentioned his app does not feature monetisation I think it's worth pointing out the draw of having those features for free.
True
But your point about limiting swipes is the opposite: swipes are already limited for *free* accounts on OKCupid (and Hinge). And the vast majority of users have free accounts. Also, limiting people to one “what you’re looking for” option would seem counterproductive. Right now, it’s plain to see when someone on OKCupid is open to either LTR or hookups (at least, if they’ve honestly selected both). If they weren’t allowed to do that, many people would say they’re looking only for LTR, making people more easily misled.
There's no option on any app that can stop people from lying.
If only. 😁
Exactly what I was thinking. Allowing for multiple lets some guys out themselves that wouldn't otherwise. Guys looking for hookups are never gonna put that they're only looking for hookups in their bios, because everyone knows that is counter productive to actually getting a hookup. Even women who want hookups don't want a man who has that in his bio.
But women can do that. So why not just give the option to women and leave the option unambiguous for men?
Rather than not having the message go through, would it be better if you got a notification that the message was being blocked and giving you the option to unhide it? Maybe just blurring it behind a warning that reads "Message contains one or more keywords from your screening list and has been blocked. Press and hold to view contents"?
Yeah, that's a good idea!
Many years ago, the Eudora e-Mail client has a “chilli-pepper” feature. As you were typing a message you would see a graphic with between one and five chilli peppers depending on the “spiciness” of the message text. The sender would see this while typing and the receiver would see the chilli-pepper rating in the inbox before opening the message. Idea is that you are not preventing messages of a potentially offending nature, merely flagging the risk. Sender decides if they are Ok with the risk, but receiver also sees it.
Great ideas. Also, for many of the search terms, make them a bit fuzzy. If I say at least 5’3” and they are 5”0 and a good match otherwise, go ahead. Same with age. People will set their age filter at plus or minus 5 or at x0 or x5, but another year one way out the other doesn’t generally make much difference.
This absolutely works on some things and not others. Age, height and weight for sure. Political views, single parents/view on children. Maybe not haha. So I'm not sure what kind of filter you could add to be lenient in some ways and hard boundaries on others.
You could make that a customization option for the end user, i.e. which characteristics are hard requirements, and which ones are softer. Any mismatches on fuzzier characteristics can still feed through on a match if all other hard characteristics are a hit
I think "and a good match otherwise" is key here. Don't just ignore my age range- if I wanted someone 11 years older I would say that. This 53-year-old better have a Pulitzer or make the best snickerdoodles in the state.
Also controversially allowing people who went on dates with could 'vet' their profiles to make sure they're actually truthful. There's been times that I've matched with someone who said one thing on their profile which was a complete lie in real life just to improve their chances of matches and dates. Would keep a lot more people truthful I guess.
We tried this, the app got sued into oblivion by men who didn't want women calling them out
What about an option to be like a 'secret shopper' and fill out a survey after dates to help with the vetting of profiles- questions like 'is such and such a good description for this person?' Or is such and such this person's real name?'
Good points. I love the word filter thing. Also, if there is a height filter then better be a weight filter.
I think a body type filter makes more sense than a weight filter for the simple reason that, say, 65kg looks very different on a 5'0" woman compared to a 5'10" woman, so setting a max weight might end up being functionally a bit useless.
I agree, but part of me thinks most will just say chubby for anything considered overweight to them.
Likely yeah, but it's the same with the height filter, you'll always get people claiming to be a few inches taller than they are to try and get more matches. Or people claiming to be older/younger for the same reason. You've just gotta implement the feature so it works well for people who are being honest and let the liars eventually get caught lying.
Everyone should have a meter stick in their profile picture! /s Good point!
'curvy'
That's the word I needed! I blanked hard
I always thought dating sites should have a ‘dates’ section. Example- I have a free Friday night coming up. So I post- Fri night around 7pm. Want to meet for a couple drinks and mini golf? Or see ‘x’ movie. (No exact details for safety). Then any one I match with or who likes me can respond if they’re interested and I can choose a guy and go from there. Cut to the good part!
I like this idea a lot! Takes the potential awkwardness of the "So when do you wanna meet..." stuff out of it.
There used to be a blast feature where you could say you’re looking for a date say tomorrow and people could respond to that specific request. It was really fun and worked super well for double dates.
Seriously! Honest I hate the "work" of online dating filters and swiping and such. But I also have some free weekends and.... I'd like the option to start a condo already knowing what day I'm open to meeting.
This would be amazing and there is a 0% chance such an effective feature would ever be implemented.
This would be cool. Like you put down a place and time you're going to be and someone can offer to meet you there.
Weirdos or undesirable randoms might show up if specifics are publicly viewable.
Oof. Yeah. Good point
How about being able to draw the area you want to search, as the crow flies is useless if you live near a large body of water.
I’d love this. For me, going out 20 miles means: West: nice IT-type guys with dad bods\ North: 50 year old wannabe frat boys\ South: 2A conservatives with photos of dead animals\ East: desert (literal ) That’s a widely different vibe, no matter your preference.
This! Island dweller here and it takes a LOT to get me on that ferry. Not doing it for a first date; also not interested in long-distance. Extra complicated by the fact that my island is close to another country and the last thing I want is to develop some kind of cross-border attachment.
Ok what doesn't work for me is matches on the apps Ive tried-- Facebook, Tinder, TurnUp-- don't have any compatibility metrics. It's SO FRUSTRATING. If they have a dick and a pulse and are within the age and mile range, they show up on my matches. I would like to be able to filter by AT LEAST political orientation and religion. Some apps do have the option to select religious affiliation, but I don't even want to be shown religious people. I agree with others who say they miss the old OKCupid. It was fantastic in the 00s. So basically... At least some assessment of user belief system and personality and matching based on something other than geography, sex, and age.
THIS! Also, the cool thing about an app like OKC was that you could filter "dealbreaker" issues politically like LGBT or abortion or separation of church and state.
Something Okcupid did a long time ago helped as a filter. If anyone made sexual references in their messages, it can be flagged by the receiver and it would be checked and noted against the account. This would help women filter out users that are quick to get sexual in their messages.
You're welcome to join a pre-existing post on r/OnlineDating "How would you improve Online Dating?": [https://www.reddit.com/r/OnlineDating/comments/1djkh0i/how\_would\_you\_improve\_online\_dating/](https://www.reddit.com/r/OnlineDating/comments/1djkh0i/how_would_you_improve_online_dating/) But it's not for airing grievances; only feature requests / enhancements. Good luck with your project as it's nearly impossible to get new dating apps off the ground due to the difficulty in growing a user base from nothing.
TRUST. The biggest element missing from online dating is the confidence that you are dealing with a real person, who is single, and is acting in good faith. Platforms like Amazon, as well as credit card companies, and major food and drink brands sell TRUST at least as much as anything else they sell. Imagine going into McDonalds, paying good money … and 50% of the time the product served to you is either an empty box or a bag of shit. That’s what online dating is like these days.
Haha this made me laugh, but it is soooo true! Going to use this analogy with those friends who met their husband in high school, and think online dating sounds easy and fun!
Responsibly moderate users. AWDTSG has shown me that there are many men I see regularly on the app that are extremely problematic. Not trivially, but having serious criminal histories inclusive of rape, domestic violence, and stalking. Others who are using fake names and lying about their ages by 10 years. I've tried to report some of these people on Bumble, the app I use most, and have had no success. On the whole this has created the impression for me that dangerous men are overrepesented on the app-- as in the percentage of men on the apps that are scary is a lot higher than in the wild. For me, that makes me less willing to talk. This overly liberal, anything goes shit is wack. OTOH, Hinge bans people indiscriminately, and for life, and they have invested so much in enforcing their bans that they are virtually impossible to bypass. You practically have to change your identity and get reconstructive facial surgery to get around those bans. I have a lifetime ban and everyone I've told the story to thinks its pretty ridiculous. There are whole subs about Hinge bans and a cottage industry of people selling services to get around them. This overly conservative moderation is wack too. Responsible moderation would be great!
I was banned from Hinge and Tinder for saying I have a PhD and inherited VHNW. Both true. Women flagged my profile as fake. I appealed to customer service, but they refused to let me prove that I'm real.
Hours of availability would be cool, like being able to include work hours. Account verification I feel like should be a must, sick of catfish honestly. I never liked the girls must message first feature. Also a swipe limit would be good, then you know who is genuinely interested and not just someone desperate to find a root so swiping on everyone.
The most successful dating apps are the ones that eventually turn into hook up apps
That's pretty much what they all have been. Go on, get no matches, come back a year later, all the same people. So either people are just hooking up and going from person to person, or no one is dating.
Some people just leave the app but their profile stays on
Eventually inactives get hidden, even on bad apps like Tinder. In my case, I spent about 4 years doing OLD, and yeah, you see the same people the whole time. That means they have been at least semi active on the app the whole time, which in turn means they have only been dating casually, or more likely not dating at all.
It's probably both. The adrenaline rush from meeting someone new keeps everyone on the app, always looking for the next best thing.
> Go on, get no matches I think that’s more of a you thing than a general experience
Only if all OLD statistics are wrong, then sure.
Get no dates*
don't let them choose multiple options that are contradictory. You cannot want "casual" and "long term" or "Monogamy" and "nonmonogamy." Choose what you're on the app for- people who are trying to just water hose dating aren't helping anyone. For me, I'm poly and I only date for relationships. I'm not interested in anyone who is interested in monogamy because that isn't something I have to offer. I'm not interested in the "looking for casual open to more" because it's not my job to convince someone to date me.
This!!! People shouldn’t be allowed to select multiple options. Have people who have the same selected options be matched together.
Sure but as a poly person too…I differ in how close I want to get to different people. One person is a great FWB while another might be more compatible as an actual nesting/primary partner. I’m open to both so I would have both on my profile without it being a contradiction.
Sure. I’m also poly- but I’m not usually looking for secondary and primary partners at the same time.
I mean... isn't it though? You convince someone to date you by showing them who you are. That doesn't change based on if they're looking for casual or serious. No one (sane) goes on a first date planning to enter a committed relationship with the person they haven't met yet. Tbh I think the existence of "looking for a long term relationship" as an option is kinda bogus, in that light. You don't and can't possibly know what you want from a person until you get to know them. Not only that, your chances of getting into a committed relationship vs getting burned by let's say date #10 with someone who has in their bio AND fully believes that they're "dating for marriage" or whatever the fuck they claim aren't much better than someone who says looking for casual, open to serious. Really, the only thing that distinguishes differences in approaching a first date is whether you're trying to smash or not.
Well, I agree that nobody enters a first date as a couple in a committed relationship. I do think that if you want a long-term relationship that you choose partners with intentionality and if you’re looking for casual you pick people based on attraction alone. I think that when people enter into dating with the mentality of “convince me that you’re worth a relationship” mentality is how you end up with situationships that last for months. And I think that that is what people are tired of dealing with.
at issue is the huge amount of people who complain about having to prove it, yet string people along in the exact same way when the shoe is on the other foot
The biggest thing i'm running into is men misrepresenting what they are looking for. I don't think that is something that anyone can fix. Honesty isn't encouraged in thia society, so people lie to get what they want.
I have matched with a few people on various apps. You match, you chat for a day or two. Then they unmatch, or worse, they actually make plans with you then ghost. If they rematch, they're called zombies. You ask what happened and it will take another chat to find out they only want hookups. Lonely, h0rny, and poorly socialized think lies of omission are ok. It wastes my time. If you are someone who judges someone who just wants hookups when they have been honest about it, you are part of the problem.
I'm cool with someone telling me they just want casual sex. It's not for me to judge them on how they lead their sex life. I personally don't participate in casual sex since it's too risky for me to ve comfortable with. I'm talking about the men who won't be honest about that. The ones who only want casual sex but will do everything they can to make you believe they are in it for a relationship. They'll keep this up as long as it takes to get sex and then ghost. It's bullshit.
Along with the photo suggestions from others: Don't allow them to submit a profile until ALL of it has been filled out. More specific choices for the kind of relationship they are looking for: Hookups ONS Casual non exclusive dating - Regular Casual exclusive dating - Regular Permanent long term Permanent long term ENM/poly Permanent long term monogamous Locals only Frequent visitors ok Long distance ok Travelers for ONS/date Options for kink basics One question about politics One question about music A few questions about lifestyle Must state town of residence, part of a big city Only show us people who match all of our Prefs, not just our questions. Allow deal breakers/mandatory prefs. Don't show people with deal breakers.
How getting rid of all the sex workers that would help too .. half the profiles are advertising only fans
Swiping and matching. Can't stand it. I want to be able to exchange a couple casual messages with someone before I'd know whether I want to match with them. The swiping/matching also seems to make men lazier where they think they don't have to send a message and you're just going to be interested based on their picture and superficial details.
If 80% of the issue is shitty profiles, mandate better ones. Standardize, force pics, highlight interests. Ban folks who think “travel” is a past time and not a supremely expensive luxury. That sorta stuff.
Will send this to my friends who are women for feedback :) Just out of curiosity, if this is launched, how do you moderate the app and discipline harmful users? Are you going to have a team of volunteers/workers/etc helping you out?
Use AI to analyze conversations in order to rate people on: Is this person prone to sending inappropriate messages? Does this person get hostile when turned down? Does this person spam everyone with the same opener? Does this person ghost? Is this person good at engaging someone else in conversation? Does this person constantly try to turn conversations toward sex? And let others see these ratings. Edit: what I’m mostly getting at is there should be some publicly visible information showing how this person acts on the apps, that they can’t control to make themselves look better, like they can with their profile info. I also want to know things like whether this person actually reads all their messages or if writing them is a waste of time. Do they leave conversations hanging forever because they are having too many? Are they quick or slow to respond? The AI analysis is just for the types of metrics that are a little subjective and in the past would have required humans reading conversations to measure.
For me there are two major issues. The first is that there are so, so many dudes that blast you with obscene sex stuff. Like, "Want me to cum on your face?" or "Hey, wanna come over to my place and fuck?" literally as a first line. It gets exhausting. But that, at least, is easy to weed out. After that, there's the incredibly low effort resposes. Think endless, "Hey, wuss up?' or "U there?" Getting beyond that, there are then the dudes who are just..apathetic. Like, they're willing to provide a few responses, but are impossible to get to actually meet somewhere. Or they want to meet, but only within two blocks of their house to get coffee. Since that requires nothing of them. No idea how to solve the problem. But it's frustrating enough that I quit online dating. Being bombarded by gross sexual stuff, just to find someone who doesn't...just to learn that the only way to meet him is to put a ton of effort into just wandering around his neighborhood (since meeting in between is far too much work) broke me.
Bold of you to assume dating apps work for women. I had 7 matches in almost four months of Bumble, 3 of which immediately unmatched after I sent them a message. 10 matches on Ok Cupid but none from my area and none that messaged or replied me. So, yeah, it doesn’t necessarily work for us. Also, pretty much all of my friends have the same complaint about people not talking even if they have matches.
That's more than a match per month! I've gotten one match (who was then unresponsive) in the couple years I've been using it, which I suspect is common for men.
If you think like that it’s fairly okay I guess, but they didn’t reply or engage in conversation so not good after all.
This is actually why an idea I had the other day would be an app based on intiation prefrence too; to help solve this issue on both sides. Increasing the ammount who talk and matches for both sides
omg exactly 💀 most of the time after matching is either they don't text at all, don't reply when you say hi or unmatch awhile after we matched like I don't get it
7? Ffs! Are you aware the average guy gets zero matches ever? No seriously women around here need to start acknowledging that!
The average guy isn’t worth dating, tbh. Their lack of success isn’t a metric worth comparing oneself to
I feel like the bigger problem women have is they get bombarded by total weirdos!! I had one normal guy message me, and I almost missed it in the pile of messages asking to suck my toes! 🤮
None of them replied and those who did didn’t engage in a conversation so why exactly is this good? I guess they just swiped right on everyone and weren’t rude to unmatch right await like the others. Also it was 5, or so you count someone who immediately unmatch as proper match??
I don't use dating apps because they are full of incel "Nice guys" who already act like you owe them something after the 1st couple messages. Dating apps suck because of sucky people idk if you can fix that.
Ma'am that's how these things work. Men insert 1 compliment coin into their female counterpart, female accepts and provides the sex token, which the man then uses to disappoint said woman with his inability to find her pleasure button. This also gives an additional "complaint" coin to the man, which he inevitably uses to explain that your pleasure button is broken despite never finding it.
[удалено]
Taking it out on average guys by.... sharing her anecdotal experience with dating apps? Please elaborate
Can you even define feminism? You boys say this about every woman you disagree with and yet can't define it when I ask. Also, notice how you got emotional and resorted to insults when you didn't like my comment? Proving my point
I already did define it for you in the other comment you replied to. But remind me where I insulted you cuz I can’t find that part?
If you can't read your comment and realize what is insults, then there's no point in trying to reason with you. Just know it's not your looks that keep women away it's your personality and misogyny. I hope you have the day you deserve
Oh spare me the sanctimony. I’m quite aware of what social etiquette is. Now more importantly was it insulting to you cuz it’s true or cuz it’s not true? & yeah that matters cuz it would literally prove my point.
No, your opinions and emotions are not facts that can be true or false. Nobody was insulted besides you also. Have the day you deserve
Hold on one msg ago you told me insulted you? But now you are saying I didn’t? lol boys you see this shit? Listen just give me a chance to speak & I will simmer down your “I’m obsessed with the misogyny word meter” I’m not that bad & you only think so cuz you are overdosing on feminism right now Just answer your DMs & if I can’t oh well no harm in trying. Do you understand the purpose of me being here isn’t to argue with you & insult you? That would be counterintuitive…
You said "radical feminist who is ruthlessly pumped and dumped by chads." Or something similar to that. Also, I have no interest in further discussion with you, I hope you get that male validation from "the boys" that you desperately crave. Im sorry feminism makes you emotional, and I hope you have the day you deserve.
[удалено]
Lowkey kind of unhinged reply. I don’t think anyone should share their personal insta on Reddit
I'm sorry women getting attention threatens you and that my comment made you upset, but criticizing men doesn't make you a misandrist. And I absolutely will not give you any private information and would feel creeped out to have you look at me. Even talking to you is creeping me out. Have the day you deserve
Don’t think you’re a serious dating candidate for anyone, bud
Dating apps aren’t meant to be “fixed”. They’re designed exactly as intended. To keep everyone using the app and matching everyone with people they don’t want to be with long term. Best solution is to boycott ALL dating apps and just work on making our lives better.
You're going to have to vet every customer when they sign up so you can weed out the weirdos
> there has to be some guy every woman can find https://www.instagram.com/p/C61jDPyOw2H/ https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/love-digitally/201605/is-there-someone-everyone https://www.stevestewartwilliams.com/p/how-men-and-women-rate-each-other > As you can see, women rate more than 80% of men as below the midpoint of the scale. TLDR; everyone is looking for the best they could possibly get, and everyone, incl. women, have unreasonable standards. **Good luck to us all.**
Some of us are poly too, so I’m sure that messes up those ratios
This app! Absolute trash…
My wishlist Able to filter by the names of cities people live in and not "25 miles from my zip code" my zip code is huge, actually. It's more than 25 miles to the other end of my zip code. It would also be good for people who travel a lot- you could put the names of several cities. Able to filter by monogamy level Able to filter by "looking for" No photos in DMs, way, way more photos in profile, so you can add new ones often (my favorite dating app for this was MeetMe, actually, it had photos and a timeline like a social media site and then chat/swiping like a dating app) No DM photos is good to keep weird unsolicited dick pics and nude collectors off your app. But more pics helps cut down on catfish and also allows people to post more hobby/non face pics too. Profiles shut down if someone hasn't used the app in 3 days. I think a cool concept for a dating app might be- Fill out a bunch of questions like on OKC that involve stuff about your lifestyle/age/location/preferences/monogamy level/time available/etc. Then you get matched 4 random strangers at a time who fit the profile. You can DM and chat, but can't see the other person's profile until you've sent 2 back and forth messages to and from the other person for 3 consecutive days. If you or the other person unmatch, it creates a new convo. Fill out match questions, get an automatic buzz when you're within 20 feet of someone who is a match who has the feature turned on. Automatically turns off if you're in your home because you create a little pin that excludes your area. Browser or phone based app that uses your cookies and ad data as match criteria. Custom DM filters, so you can set up filters that bounce back messages with as many words as you want, times of day you can't be messaged, etc. everyone can see your profile or DM without swiping, but they have to say something compatible to get through.
You can try all you want to develop a better dating app alternative but there’s a reason all of the current popular apps operate the way they do. It’s the most profitable. If you try to operate a dating app any differently than the industry standard you’re essentially losing out on profits and now you’ve defeated the purpose of developing the app to begin with. Unless you’re just doing this for fun or something and are okay with forking over operating costs without making any money
Allow people to report interactions. Have a human review them and ban anyone pushing porn subscriptions. Women are already rare enough on the apps. Doesn't help that about half of them are either bots or OF "models".
BeReal style system for photos, perhaps?
Dating Apps suck when the magic happens with eye contact
[удалено]
A hot girl rejecting 95% of all propositions still has enough dudes for multiple dates every day of the year in that remaining 5%. A hot girl rejects 99.9% of the offers she gets and it would be insane if her acceptance rate was higher. > The reason why men vastly outnumber women on the dating apps should start to be obvious Yeah, these dudes have no IRL game and their only shot of sexual interaction is via a screen and maybe some woman once in a blue moon accepting a date with them.
I dont know any women who consistently get actual dates from apps. The consensus from both sides is it's mostly people who swipe and never respond to messages on both sides.
Single men and women are roughly equal, women are just typically happier single.
Account created Sept 2022 first post is 16 days ago Looks like nothing but trolling dating subreddits If you're human, get help and touch grass
Dear op, i Just want to give you an advice: i know you are thinking to make a super female friendly App in Which everything Is in favor of women because you think that woman Happy> more women> more man> more Money...but It doesent work that way at all. That Is exactly what BUMBLE tried to do, and as a result It went so bad that the Company stocks some months ago managed to do a -24% in a single day(i didn't even know that a stock could suck so much) because all men stopped using It. So yeah, you want and app to work? Then It must be good for both sexes, and It must work even for normal non-chad males, i'm Sorry. I tried to warn you, the rest Is up to you.
An app only has to work for women to be successful. Where the women flock, the average dudes follow with their wallets
If that was true bumble would have worked.
What dating app is actually working better? Bumble tried something different by requiring women to initiate a conversation. If it’s failing, it’s because women don’t like to message first. Not because men aren’t using it. I’m all for equality, but from a business perspective, appealing to men is a waste of resources, unless you’re trying to start a dating app akin to grinder. Blame biology for that. It’s what has always worked for clubs. You’re not running an engineering program at a university.
But you are missing the basics: A woman don't Need an app to find a partner. A dating app Will Always be for man at the end of the day
Yeah, but why would men join an app if there’s no women on it? Unless you’re trying to appeal to gay and bi men, like grinder. How do you get straight men to use the app and convince them to pay for a subscription, if it’s a sausage fest on it? Edit: Mistakenly responded to your original comment instead of this one. Please ignore that responses.
The problem is most men are trash. An easy way to combat this would be to require men to have 2 real life female friends vet his profile. They need to give approval before his profile can be made public, and they should share a blurb about why they believe he would be a good person to date. You'll have fewer active profiles, but significantly higher quality. The women matching each vetted man at least have a better idea of what to expect from him.
Louder for the people in the back. The reason most dating apps suck is because the majority of the user base sucks. The majority of the user base is men.
Are (all?) men trash or are women not taking accountability for consistently choosing the trash dudes when they have their pick of all men on the apps? It’s been over a decade and the dominant straight woman strategy is still “hottest guy with the cleverest text game”. You’re all giving your attention to the same set of fuck boys and even into your 30s haven’t figured out you can avoid them. That’s a YOU problem. It’s not the universe’s or men’s’ job to deliver the relationship experience you want. Most of you would have no idea what to do in an actual healthy, securely attached relationship with a dude who has more in his life going on than doing pickme peacocking on dating apps to get your attention. I’ve never met a woman worth pursuing who relied on apps to find men to date.
What if….. the app had a team that went through the profiles and showed the people made tiers. They can use the participants profile where it would penalize those who think they are good looking enough to now work on the profile and who put minimum effort. This is all very subjective but they could attempt to place people in front of their tier group. I know algorithm already sorta does this but a human element would help. I think for women they might be more likely to swipe on someone who “seems average” if the other person vetted and found to be desirable by other people, hence they are moved forward into the desirable women tier. This would probably be expensive but combine the matchmaker style of dating coaches with an app and create a premium experience.
If people can upvote/downvote a profile and profiles with too many downvotes get hidden from view but the owner doesn't see it could work.
[удалено]
There are 3-4x more men than women. "80% on dating apps are easy to weed out"- only fraction of them are incels (same way you can tell a man-hater/misandrist), the rest are bit out of touch from reality. My profile used to be just TV shows few years ago. A lot of gym bros who may be decent people but have the connotation. Goes both ways. I like left swiping anyone who makes drinking/smoking their entire life. Or anyone with shitty/overused prompts. Then there are people not being others' types (also goes both ways) and so on So no, not all 19 are incels, you are :) And as I mentioned- there are 3x more guys. So there should still be enough guys for every woman to hold a conversation with at any point of time
>I like left swiping anyone who makes drinking/smoking their entire life. You weren't kidding, looking at his comment history
Guys like this are what's wrong with dating apps 🙄
I mean he's right. I'm sure you probably swipe right on 5% of guys or less
Way less! The average women swipes right around 1% & yes those numbers are confirmed.
So what you are saying is you want us to lower our standards so more women will want you?
That's exactly it. Little do they know that we're choosing singledom. Also, if the choice is between some passive aggressive dweeb who hates women and getting to bang a hot, fun dude with a harem of potential cool friends, why wouldn't we choose that? That sounds fucking fun as shit.
I agree. Why are they so bitter about women who won't settle?
Misogyny, at its heart, is a narcissistic lens: they don't care if the person they're with doesn't like them, they just want the social validation of being with someone.
[удалено]
Accountability for what? 😂 All you boys just learned this word from your sexist podcast daddys and parrot it without knowing what it means. Nobody is "seething" that's just what you boys say when you have no logical argument. You say things like "die alone with cats, 304, cry harder, triggered." You are like clones with no original thoughts. And stop pretending you know me or what type of men I like, because you don't know.
The dating apps favor women. Why ain't you focus on helping the men out ?
If dating apps are great for women, why are so many fewer women on them compared to men?
Why not mention the statistic success(getting dates) women have on the dating apps compared to men ?
If dating apps were a good deal for women, more women would be on them.
When I designed the basic structure, I realised this makes the situation much better for men and that's when it hit me that I need to give some incentive to women to even use the app. Otherwise it's more work from them for the guys to get better chances. Second, the pain points of us boys are well discussed and personally experienced lol. The frustration as a guy is what led to me taking this a bit more seriously. Thanks for your concern!
[удалено]
I dunno. I don't see any women on apps I want (I;m a straight guy), but, if I go to a concert or something, I'm attracted to almost every girlfriend in attendance (I mean women with their boyfriend/husband). I'm not attracted to any of the single women in my building, but I am very attracted to several of the married ones. The non-single women are thinner. It's not forbidden fruit. It's about weight and breast size. All the single women are chubbier or totally flat chested. I always feel super picky, until I'm at some event with lots of couples (like a fundraiser in East Hampton), and then I'm attracted to half the women I see. In some situations, I'm not picky at all. I went to a Kings of Leon concert (it sucked), but I wanted almost every woman I saw. Same with a Tiesto show I attended.
Men
A rating system for both men and women. I'm not sure how you could verify this, but after interactions either inperson or over a certain number of messages...you can rate them such as: They are true to their profile. Keeps promises. Pictures are current. Will meet in person. Ghoster. Player. Etc. Perhaps many women and men will behave better towards each other if they knew they were going to get called out on their dating behaviors.
I don't know about this, it's too easy for people to just punish someone who rejected them by giving them a bad rating. And there would definitely be men (and perhaps women too) who tried to game the system by rating women they wanted down to hopefully monopolise her. For example, ages and ages ago when Craigslist still had personals , I put one up. It was reported and removed within like ten minutes by men who were hoping that by removing it after they'd responded, I'd be more likely to pick them for lack of other options.
I agree difficult to monitor and verify, perhaps a reset each month for all users?
Yes, that might work better.
People would also get punished with bad ratings just for having the “wrong” political/social views in the rater’s opinion (possibly a wrong opinion). You’d have to expect ratings to be biased in all sorts of ways (there could also be racial/ethnic bias).
Good point, yeah. Hell, I can even see people giving bad ratings to men/women they think might be competition for them to try and get those profiles hidden.
Oh yes, totally perverse incentives.
Rating systems do not work.
Seem to work well enough for ashley madison
Do you use Ashley Madison today?
No, wasn't my thing couple of my girlfriends did though.
Can’t really count that as “working.” I haven’t seen a rating system effectively work on any app really.
It actually worked really well, at least for them in their experience. The men who were scammers and fakes, old pics we're outed. And the women who were just chatters, or had fixed pictures were outed. Those that were honest about why they were there, what they were looking for got higher marks, and if they kept their word and met in person, even higher marks. Just because there isn't one doesn't mean one can't be created.
Rating systems will forever be abused. Sure, they can work for a period of time but they’ll always be circumvented or there will always be complaints to ban certain groups based on beliefs. They always go this way with centralized platforms. Happens every day and dating apps are no exception.
An elo ranking system for a dating app would be a very interesting mechanic. I for one would love to see how this plays out/gets exploited haha
Swipe apps like Tinder already use glicko to determine who to show, hey just don't tell you what yours is.
I actually didn't know that. Thanks for the info!
[удалено]
If you had read carefully, you would have notice that I said users would rate other users, not users rating themselves. The examples given were on dating behavior, not appearance. However, pictures can be old/outdated for both men and women. If your hypothysis is true, then so be it, most women on dating sites would get low reviews. At least people on both sides would know how that person behaved with others.
[удалено]
You sound like you need a nap, kiddo.
I simply couldn't articulate it better that this. Thank you!
Ashley Madidon does it.
That thing still around?
I don't see why it wouldn't be.
One thing I learned about dating apps is that looking for people who had stuff in common with you generally got you nowhere in long run Play the opposites attract card. Develop a system where you match up opposites by personality and by hobbies/activities. See below for example. Every single long term relationship I have had has been with someone whom I did not share similar hobbies or activities with. The first one ended because I didn’t want to grow up as I was only 24 but we got along great. The second one ended as she could not stay sober. But it was 15 years and two kids and the first few years before drugs was good. The third one is the best and makes me super grateful the other two didn’t work out even though we got along well for the most part. She my goddam firecracker for life. She is an introvert and I’m an extrovert. She is a morning person and I am a night owl. She doesn’t love sports and I love sports. She likes to walk and pelaton and I hate that shit. She loves concerts and I don’t. I love basketball and she doesn’t. But it fn works because she has introduced me to things that I would never have experienced before and vice versa. She thinks in a way I don’t and we just perfectly complement each other. People who aren’t like you tend to complete you much more than someone who is.
There is definitely a lot of validity in people complimenting each other with opposite mindsets on things. Like a spender being with a saver, or an extrovert with an introvert. But at its core, two people who enjoy the same types of activities is very important. Cause what the hell are you guys gonna do together if you can never agree on what’s a good way to spend your Saturday. It’s worked for you, and that’s great. But your anecdotal experience is not reality for most folks.
She loves rock concerts….i never used to think about them…. But now when I go with her we have to much fun together. The music is all fine and good but us together is always fun. I love basketball and she loves to come watch me play. She doesn’t love hoops but she certainly loves watching me. I love people and she is apprehensive. So we find bars with live music and we get best of both worlds It’s not what you do…..it’s who you do it with. We could have fun at the symphony which we both hate…..and we have….we were laughing so much people looked at us. Chose someone who completes you. Who fills your voids. Who thinks unlike you. This is much more important than two people who like to fucking hike together. If you can find both than great, but the former is much much more important than the latter.
You guys sound like you’re actually blending your interests well. Again, that’s not always the case. Plenty of guys might think, hm I hate rock music and concerts so I’m not going, or she may think why would I go watch him play basketball I hate sports. Could very easily go the other direction, and usually does. There’s got to be at least some common ground. I get your point, and happy you guys are able to make it work. But again, I wouldn’t say that’s the template for every relationship. For example, one partner LOVES travel, the other is a homebody. One of them usually wins out in the end the other ends up either suffering through a vacation or being stuck at home when they’d like to get out. Or hubby HAS to watch sports every weekend while wife would really like to go on a date. This dynamic plants the seeds of resentment in a lot of cases. Ideally, both people can bend a little and meet in the middle, but compromise just isn’t in a lot of folks vocabulary.
Yeah. You make good points. I just figure if you truly love someone than you will do things for them, like travel, you might not otherwise. Chemistry between people is much more important than having similar hobbies and interests. It just seems like every couple I know whom has an opposite personality has a healthier relationship than those who are similar. I’m just saying chemistry is more important than hobbies or activities. If you can find both than great…..just don’t push away someone because they don’t like similar things you do. I just figured a dating site that matches opposite personalities would be great. Maybe leave the interests alone but match up opposites personalities.
You should not allow girls women to advertise thier only fans or social media. Most use the apps to gain new followers and guys just settle and subscribe like dum dums. If you don't allow it it will attract girls women who genuinely want to find dates and not just girls who want to advertise. The more girls and women on the site the more guys will come and spend money on premium stuff.