Slashdot Mirror
Why Nobody Wants You On OKCupid
Hugh Pickens writes "Social awkwardness has the most opportunity to shine in your very first message to a potential sweetheart, write Andrea Bartz and Brenna Ehrlich at CNN. Bartz and Ehrlich enumerate and humorously describe seven types of message senders: the generalizer, the autobiographer, the 'eccentric,' the creeper, the gusher, and the wordless wonder. Our favorite: the generalizer, whose typical first message may be 'hey, wuts up?' Why does no one want the generalizer? 'You're probably stupid. Or possibly illiterate,' write Bartz and Ehrilich. According to OKTrends, bad grammar and bad spelling are huge turn-offs in a first message. 'Our negative correlation list is a fool's lexicon: ur, u, wat, wont, and so on. These all make a terrible first impression. In fact, if you count hit (and we do!) the worst 6 words you can use in a first message are all stupid slang.' Other tips from OKTrends' analysis of successful keywords and phrases from over 500,000 first contacts on OKCupid: Avoid physical compliments, bring up specific interests, and if you're a guy, be self-effacing."
I'm not on OKcupid and I'm not looking for dates, but I read OKcupid's statistics blog regularly with a lot of pleasure. The guys who run the site have fascinating insight and great data analysis skills. And they are also good at explaining things simply. Well worth reading for geek minded people. Especially if they don't have a mate yet !!!
Non-Linux Penguins ?
women complain men are obsessed with t&a but women are exactly the same: if you're not tall, it doesn't matter if you are a CEO and run 3 charities: she'll pick the tall guy who still lives with his mom
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Hey, I liked your message.
Don't you find that changing how you communicate is different from changing who you are? I think all communication is very much a game with rules. Breaking the rules does get you sent off the field in any game.
How would you feel about a footballer who doesn't want to play his best game because it would change who he was? (Scoring goals is too mainstream, it's just not me! ) I'd call that player a fool, but maybe that's just me.
Let me know what you think,
Alex
They may be out there, but the unfortunate part is that none of them initiate the conversations. I don't consider myself an unattractive person, but I've never had a woman wink/poke/etc. or initiate conversation. It's like they all just post their profile and hope someone picks them. I may as well go out to a bar with that sort of "dating". As usual, it's always up to the guy to start the conversation and the woman gets to weed out the candidates.
It's not like I don't start conversations. I've had many on these sites and sometimes we meet up, other times we call it before. It's mainly that I have to do all the legwork to get things rolling. For once, It would be nice to have someone else start the ball rolling.
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
The reason is because honest self-effacing shows a cool confidence. Making a show of confidence, however, actually shows insecurity. It's not what you say, it's what you display.
It's more like: that guy who goes to an interview in shorts, tie-dye t-shirt, long hair in a pony-tail, scraggly beard, socks and sandals because "Hey if they don't like me for who I am, I don't want to work there" and wonders why he can't get a job despite having a PhD in Computer Science. For better or worse, people judge you and make their opinions of you based on their first contact with you, within the first minute.
If you believe in God, great, but your first contact with someone shouldn't be: "Hey! I really really love God! Maybe we could go to a prayer-meeting sometime?". Even if the other person believes in God too, they'll probably think you're a tad weird. Similarly, if your first contact is: "hye thr saw ur profiel n u lk rly hot", it doesn't matter whether you are the most kind-hearted, baby-kissingest, puppy-lovingest charity worker ever to volunteer at a soup-kitchen, you'll come across as a shallow dummy who can't even be bothered to spell the most basic words correctly.
tl;dr No-one's saying you have to change who you are, they're just offering tips on how to present yourself.
This is what you fail to understand: Religious people look very stupid and somewhat insane to the non-religious. How can anyone be expected to form a serious relationship with someone they view as stupid and insane? This is not a troll or a dig but simply a statement of fact. Whether it is fair or not, that's the way non-religious people feel.
Bye, bye karma!
"Liechtenstein is the world's largest producer of sausage casings, potassium storage units, and false teeth."
Yes we do. Not all women do, you're right, but some do. I've been on OKC since October, and up til about a month ago, I was sending out between two and six messages in a given week to start conversations with guys. I don't wink or poke or "sup" because I think that's lazy (implies that I'm not interested in a specific guy, just any guy who'll respond), and I don't respond to those messages for the same reason. But women who initiate _do_ exist, and we _are_ on the dating sites. And actually, I initiate conversation IRL too. The problem is that some guys get unnerved by it or make judgments about what kind of girl we might be, so we get reluctant about making the first move. Me, I treat it like a filter--any guy who'd get freaked out by my making the first move is probably not someone I'd get along with in the long run anyway.
I disagree, the first makes me want to cut out my eyeballs to not have to read that drivel, the second makes me realize the person sending it is a psychopath.
Both would end bad if you met up, but the latter is clear, concise and legible as compared to the former being written by a 5 year old or a mental patient who can barely communicate over shouting his own name as a reply.
Women wants:
- I want someone, right or wrong, to start a family with now now NOW NOW NOWNOWNOW.
- He must be making at least above median salary for a professional in the area.
- His hobbies must exactly parallel my own.
- He must be as much a dogmatized zealot as I am.
- He must be athletically built and be "smart, witty, and able to surprise me". (this is usually in conjunction with three or more of the other wants as well).
- "I want a man who knows what he wants." I've actually seen it spelled out that plainly, and all I can think to say is "no, no you don't"I still don't know what it means, because women who have said that have absolutely come to hate me for expressing my expectations honestly.
- HE MUST LOVE BASEBALL AS MUCH AS I DO. (note, this means watching professional baseball, not actually PLAYING a sport. No, that would be interesting and show some character of the person.)
My wants:
- I want someone technically minded that I can communicate with, on even a simple level. I don't expect the person to be able to read circuit diagrams or understand packet captures, but PLEASE at least understand to check to make sure the mouse is plugged in before complaining that "it's broken".
- I would prefer someone who can read and speak at a level above that of an eighth grade junior high school student.
- At the risk of being superficial, I would prefer to not be able to wear her jeans and they be baggy.
And I'm not even stereotyping, I mean, I am, but this is literally how it is. Half of them appear to be looking for at immediate meal ticket/family man, and the other half are looking for the male lead from their favorite romantic comedy. I just want someone who will at least nod, smile, and pretend to care when I'm talking to them about my day, who can figure out how to change the remote batteries on her own, and who isn't cutting off the circulation to my legs when she's on top. If those are huge demands, then I guess I'm just an misogynistic, judgmental asshole.
My big realization was that, due to societal norms, there's maybe 1% of the female population out there that fits my criteria. That's one of the reasons why I stopped going to bars for women and started trying the online thing. I figured I could expose myself to a larger pool of candidates. I should have guessed that there was a very specific type of people that have to resort to such measures.
The aggressive, self-confident girl of XKCD is _not_ looking for love online.
True, but she's not looking for love in bars either. She would have already found hers long ago.
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
I agree. However, as a divorced man, I find there are aspects of male-female relations that I miss profoundly. I miss the intimacy of having a woman as my best friend. It isn't just about sex. Sex is easy to get, but it's hollow when it's just about servicing a biological need. It's like having a nice steak dinner. Sure, it was good, but it only lasted for that time it took to consume. Making love with a woman you love is beyond the steak dinner... Far, far beyond it.
That said, I hate dating. I'd rather get to know someone organically, and if we find we like each other's company, then date. Online dating to me has been an utterly shallow misadventure.
I totally expect to be alone for a while, and I'm okay with that. I have done exactly what you describe since my divorce, and find I enjoy my life thoroughly. But it would be nice to find someone I can share it with.