Slashdot Mirror
Dating Website eHarmony's Ad Banned For Claiming Service Is 'Scientifically Proven' (bbc.com)
A dating website's claim that it used a "scientifically proven matching system" to pair up those looking for love, has been banned. From a report: An advert for eHarmony on the London Underground in July read: "It's time science had a go at love." The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) called the claim "misleading." The online matchmaker said while it "respectfully disagrees" with the ruling, it will make its advertising "as clear as possible." The website was unable to offer the ASA any evidence that customers had a greater chance of finding love, despite claiming that its "scientifically proven matching system decodes the mystery of compatibility and chemistry." "Imagine being able to stack the odds of finding lasting love entirely in your favour," the advert read.
I have never tried eHarmony. But I did meet my girlfriend of the past 6 years on OK cupid.
I am planning to ask her to marry me in the spring.
But I would hardly call online dating websites scientific. I would say it comes down more to luck, and both of us being honest with what we wanted.
First law of people: People are generally stupid.
How about not excusing puffery. It doesn't make the world any better.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
And others have the situation firmly in hands.
#DeleteFacebook
The problem with Dating in general, it is up to the guy to initiate the meeting. So the ladies often complain about too much traffic, while the guys complain about lack of responses.
So the guy that respects women will rarely get a response as they will sound boring, because they will be polite and respectful. While the jerk will lie and do whatever it takes to get noticed. So the women notices the Jerk.
If society approved the Woman and Men equally initiating the meeting, then chances are there will be a bit more equal chance of finding each other.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Eons ago, during a period where I was on the market, I tried making an eHarmony account. They rejected/banned me right off the bat without explaining why. Something about the answers I gave during the lengthy profile creation process caused them to give up on me with no explanation, and no recourse. Just basically, "we can't help you, go away".
Match.com was useless since both parties had to be paying members in order to send/receive messages. A rather broken and pointless model as it leads to an EXTREMELY limited pool. So I didn't bother.
OKCupid was and remains free. Met my current partner there and we've been together 5+ years now.
The claims are so over the top that it would be expected no reasonable person would believe they actually had scientists applying scientific methods to the match-making algorithm. This should have been a clear and obvious case of mere puffery.
It didn't need to be.
eHarmony could have said. At eHarmony, we apply the scientific method. By paying for this service, you accept the possibility that you may be part of our double-blind control group, where we assign candidates semi-randomly. By semi-randomly, we mean we'll still try to find someone who fulfills your most basic criteria and who lives near your area, but some of those criteria will be chosen by a random algorithm instead of using our match-making algorithms. This is so that we're able to improve the success rate of our match-making algorithms over time.
What is science? Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Should have called it AI dating, with blockchained dating histories. Stock prices would have quadrupled at least.
...if someone isn't married by 30, they are defective goods and single for a reason.
I must be double-plus special! I'm only 40 and I've already completed 2 entire marriages!
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
When asked for proof, starting a sentence with "Imagine..." is when healthy people get Tourettes seizures.
If society approved the Woman and Men equally initiating the meeting, then chances are there will be a bit more equal chance of finding each other.
That's stupid - society doesn't give a fuck, men don't give a fuck, but women do.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
The ASA, however, was aware of all this -- but science is not just about inputs and process, it's about replicable outcomes. And there's no studies showing that eHarmony marriages have MTBF that's materially better than other marriages.