We both had pretty detailed profiles with lots of photos
Same with my wife and I who met online a couple of years back. Even back then, lots of other men would complain about having a hard time getting matches, being poorly treated on dates, etc. which did happen to me, but just as often I’d make a promising connection.
I think part of the reason I was relatively successful despite not being terribly attractive is I treated online dating a bit like online shopping, whereas I think others treat it like a virtual version of bumping in to someone at a bar.
To give you an example of a profile I might skip:
My idea of a great first date: Just about anything!
Likes: food, traveling, and probably your dog
Dealbreakers: pineapple on pizza
First prompt tells me nothing about you besides you’re easy going. That’s a great opportunity to share something you like doing, squandered.
Second prompt is the same likes that everybody writes in their profile, and doesn’t lead to naturally staring a unique conversation. Everybody likes “travel and food” so, “Where have you travelled,” and, “What’s your favourite food,” are well-trodden and tired topics IMO. Either share something specific about food or travel, or mention something else entirely.
Third prompt takes another opportunity to save us both some time by stating an actual deal breaker, squandered into a cliche joke.
A better version of that profile could be (just winging it off the top of my head):
My idea of a great first date: I love to ride my bike! Let’s ride some trails and then get a dessert. I know the best spot in town for croissants!
Likes: blunt communication and lots of personal space to get to know someone
Dealbreakers: if you still live with your parents
First prompt tells me that you like biking which could be a conversation breaker about which trails you like, what type of bike you ride, and we could also talk about that croissant place, or our other favourite desserts.
Second prompt is useful as someone approaching dating you, and could be a deal breaker for potential suitors.
Third prompt states a real deal breaker which could save us both time, and it’s not something (religion, political affiliation, hair colour) which is usually covered in the profile and filterable in your preferences, or in photos.
In my opinion, there were a lot more of the former type of profiles, but I found it easier to break the ice and connect with the latter type of profile. The former profile is fine if you’re both just looking for a hook up and the prompts are secondary to the eye candy, but if you’re looking for a long lasting connection, it’s all about the prompts.
My question to those who are dating just a couple of years later: how have things changed?
whereas I think others treat it like a virtual version of bumping in to someone at a bar.
Little to do with your point, but I think it’s worth mentioning here.
I read this whole thing about how it’s absolutely nothing like bumping into someone in a bar which is part of why it’s so bad.
The jist of it is that in a bar, your options are limited. So even if someone doesn’t visually meet your ideal, you often get over the hump quickly and get to know them as a person which might all of a sudden make them attractive to you.
On an app, if they don’t meet your visual ideal, the next candidate is just a figurative swipe left and so there is zero chance to get over that hump.
Plus, in an app, you don’t see the group of people surrounding the most attractive options, whether they are trying to filter through them or have fun with each one they like.
Also, you can lower your tolerance of the less fun stuff because it feels like there’s always more options available. Like someone but they aren’t available on a free day you have? Someone else might be available on that day, so just pivot to them. Or try both at once, or keep the other on the backburner, only to discover they could read the sudden adjusted level of interest and aren’t as keen themselves anymore.
It happened once to me in RL. I met one girl at a bar one night, hit it off with her well. Then, that same week, she wasn’t able to come to another bar I was going to and I started out wingmanning for a friend by talking to the friend of someone he was interested in so he could talk to her and ended up going home with that friend. I couldn’t handle having two girls being interested and ended up screwing it up with both. But that’s what it almost always feels like with online dating, and I bet it’s even worse for women who get way more matches.
And on top of that, I know that Tinder makes more money if someone wants to find a partner but fails to. I know they have incentive to hire people (or bots) to match, chat for a bit, then flake out. Or independent scammers looking to chat and take money. I have a paid sub and had what seemed like a great match right as renewal was coming up, then she flaked before a date could happen. Who knows if she was real or not, she could have been but at this point it’s hard to get excited about meeting anyone, which makes it harder to engage genuinely, and I hardly feel anything even when I do match with someone that I think I’d really like.
I’m glad I’m generally content being single or this would be pretty depressing.
Same with my wife and I who met online a couple of years back. Even back then, lots of other men would complain about having a hard time getting matches, being poorly treated on dates, etc. which did happen to me, but just as often I’d make a promising connection.
I think part of the reason I was relatively successful despite not being terribly attractive is I treated online dating a bit like online shopping, whereas I think others treat it like a virtual version of bumping in to someone at a bar.
To give you an example of a profile I might skip:
First prompt tells me nothing about you besides you’re easy going. That’s a great opportunity to share something you like doing, squandered.
Second prompt is the same likes that everybody writes in their profile, and doesn’t lead to naturally staring a unique conversation. Everybody likes “travel and food” so, “Where have you travelled,” and, “What’s your favourite food,” are well-trodden and tired topics IMO. Either share something specific about food or travel, or mention something else entirely.
Third prompt takes another opportunity to save us both some time by stating an actual deal breaker, squandered into a cliche joke.
A better version of that profile could be (just winging it off the top of my head):
First prompt tells me that you like biking which could be a conversation breaker about which trails you like, what type of bike you ride, and we could also talk about that croissant place, or our other favourite desserts.
Second prompt is useful as someone approaching dating you, and could be a deal breaker for potential suitors.
Third prompt states a real deal breaker which could save us both time, and it’s not something (religion, political affiliation, hair colour) which is usually covered in the profile and filterable in your preferences, or in photos.
In my opinion, there were a lot more of the former type of profiles, but I found it easier to break the ice and connect with the latter type of profile. The former profile is fine if you’re both just looking for a hook up and the prompts are secondary to the eye candy, but if you’re looking for a long lasting connection, it’s all about the prompts.
My question to those who are dating just a couple of years later: how have things changed?
Little to do with your point, but I think it’s worth mentioning here.
I read this whole thing about how it’s absolutely nothing like bumping into someone in a bar which is part of why it’s so bad.
The jist of it is that in a bar, your options are limited. So even if someone doesn’t visually meet your ideal, you often get over the hump quickly and get to know them as a person which might all of a sudden make them attractive to you.
On an app, if they don’t meet your visual ideal, the next candidate is just a figurative swipe left and so there is zero chance to get over that hump.
Plus, in an app, you don’t see the group of people surrounding the most attractive options, whether they are trying to filter through them or have fun with each one they like.
Also, you can lower your tolerance of the less fun stuff because it feels like there’s always more options available. Like someone but they aren’t available on a free day you have? Someone else might be available on that day, so just pivot to them. Or try both at once, or keep the other on the backburner, only to discover they could read the sudden adjusted level of interest and aren’t as keen themselves anymore.
It happened once to me in RL. I met one girl at a bar one night, hit it off with her well. Then, that same week, she wasn’t able to come to another bar I was going to and I started out wingmanning for a friend by talking to the friend of someone he was interested in so he could talk to her and ended up going home with that friend. I couldn’t handle having two girls being interested and ended up screwing it up with both. But that’s what it almost always feels like with online dating, and I bet it’s even worse for women who get way more matches.
And on top of that, I know that Tinder makes more money if someone wants to find a partner but fails to. I know they have incentive to hire people (or bots) to match, chat for a bit, then flake out. Or independent scammers looking to chat and take money. I have a paid sub and had what seemed like a great match right as renewal was coming up, then she flaked before a date could happen. Who knows if she was real or not, she could have been but at this point it’s hard to get excited about meeting anyone, which makes it harder to engage genuinely, and I hardly feel anything even when I do match with someone that I think I’d really like.
I’m glad I’m generally content being single or this would be pretty depressing.