| Tick tock, the time has come! Grab your bibs and steak knives, and show me what you’re made of!
Posted: 6/24/2008 8:56:04 AM | Often enough in the profile reviews someone pops up and says "stop giving people advice - they should write what they think is right to write, to convey who they are". And, in most cases, I disagree with the observation. There is a skill to writing the profile that people don't have, and the things they say come across in a wrong way. It looks right to them, but they have no idea how it looks to someone else, because they are not used to looking at profiles in critical and analytical ways.
That is not the case with those who are reviewers. Through the process of reviewing profiles and looking at things in terms of what works and what doesn't, I find most reviewers profiles to be past the point where there are objectively wrong things to say. My own profile was horrible at the start - I refined it to the point where it generally worked. It was not perfect, of course, but it was pretty much me, with any strengths and weaknesses in it reflecting who I was.
And that is where I feel Deuce's profile is. I liked his original better than I like the current one. The original one was Deuce, and all the good things and bad things that Deuce is. And I feel as I see the revisions that it is starting to look more and more like a profile designed by a committee. It just lacks a certain Deuceness. It is still great, or course - I don't think anyone has given a bad advice. But, it seems to have lost some of the bite, some of the personality, some of the the things that make Deuce who he is.
So, in this case, I am on the other side. Too many cooks spoil the broth. | |
|
| |
| |
| Tick tock, the time has come! Grab your bibs and steak knives, and show me what you’re made of!
Posted: 6/24/2008 10:49:38 AM | The only thing that I will say is that it's too long. .. I didn't even take the time to read it.
Profiles that long I will only skim.. If I do any reading at all. Unless your pictures draw me in, you've lost me...
Now for your pictures.. I love the comments you have on them... you added humor to take away from the lack of smiles... very nicely done!! | |
|
| Tick tock, the time has come! Grab your bibs and steak knives, and show me what you’re made of!
Posted: 6/24/2008 12:22:36 PM |
Profiles that long I will only skim.. If I do any reading at all. Unless your pictures draw me in, you've lost me...
Now for your pictures.. I love the comments you have on them... you added humor to take away from the lack of smiles... very nicely done!! Nice contradiction! ;-)
Bro, you sort of touched on the idea but yes Yev has a way with his thoughts most definitely. | |
|
| Tick tock, the time has come! Grab your bibs and steak knives, and show me what you’re made of!
Posted: 6/25/2008 6:44:41 AM | I really have to side with Shadow Outline here as he's got a really good point that I also noticed. I felt the original had too much flair in it but it was entertaining and I liked it. It could have used some trimming to make it flow nicer but Deuce told us his intentions and he has done a nice job of bringing it down to size but now with all of your help it appears to be more fake than it ever did. I didn't see his original as staged. I've not read much of his posts so I can't comment on his personality or style but I thought it was entertaining yet humble and very well written. I'm not sure what Shadow means by "...all the bad things that Deuce is" as from what I read and hear the guy is considered a demi-god in these circles and is more than respected for his opinions and interest in helping others. He's verbose and loquacious, and I saw someone say recently that he needs to learn when to quit typing sometimes but I have yet to read a post of his and be bored.
I'm still voting for Option A by the way as I liked the introduction to the profile. All three are good but it's a nice way to open. Deuce, any chance you'd do the profile up as you would have done it to start dating initially and post it for us to see what your idea of a solid profile in your eyes would have been? You said the original wasn't something you would use but you don't seem too happy with this new one either and I think you are just "playing ball" here. | |
|
| Tick tock, the time has come! Grab your bibs and steak knives, and show me what you’re made of!
Posted: 6/25/2008 7:11:51 AM | I'm not sure what Shadow means by "...all the bad things that Deuce is" as from what I read and hear the guy is considered a demi-god in these circles...
Oh, unquestionably... I have nothing but the highest admiration for Deuce.
I didn't mean to imply that there were things in the profile or in Deuce I consider objectively bad. Perhaps I should've said "right" and "wrong". No one person is right for everyone, and we all look for someone who is not just a good person, but someone who is right for us.
There are quite a few character traits that I know are considered desirable by many people, but that would not be right for me. Likewise, there are some traits that I know would make me more desirable that I don't possess, but some of the recent experiences made me unwilling to torture myself to the point where I lose who I am to attract someone.
Same with Deuce. He has traits that should attract considerable number of those who are looking for someone like him, and they would look at those traits as pluses. But, they would also turn off those who are not looking for these traits, and they would look at same traits as minuses. And toning down display of those traits is not good for either him or those who are interesting in him. | |
|
| Tick tock, the time has come! Grab your bibs and steak knives, and show me what you’re made of!
Posted: 6/25/2008 7:13:41 AM | I seriously don't think OP wanted any of the feedback in this thread, I mean have you seen that he's only taken bits and pieces of our advice and changed his profile to suit his tastes despite of what we said, how dare he think he could NOT DO everything we suggested! At the very least he should have complained and said our advice wasn't PERFECT, and then told us all we didn't know what we were doing.
What's the deal OP?
Ok... someone come along and defend him with long posts and then crucify those who are trying to help.
* This post is dripping with sarcasm, for those of you who can't tell or think sarcasm has no place in the world. Your profile is great Buddy!* | |
|
| Tick tock, the time has come! Grab your bibs and steak knives, and show me what you’re made of!
Posted: 6/25/2008 8:50:22 AM | HOW DARE YOU....
LOL I was certainly hoping you were bluffing there D4AGL, as I have taken virtually every bit of advice along the way and incorporated it to the point where my profile looks like a cosmetically "enhanced" version of who I am. Bookrat said my initial profile looked staged and was a performance but this here what I have now looks like a performance to me. | |
|
| th
Posted: 6/25/2008 9:54:43 AM | Maybe we need some different data here.
I found a text content analyser on the internet on a site called usingenglish (under resources). theres some interesting variations in albeit a limited set of data. I feel a spreadsheet coming on :-)
mine says
Total Word Count: 484
Total Unique Words: 272
Number of Sentences: 48
Average Sentence Length: 10.08
Number of Paragraphs: 5
Hard Words: 35 (7.23%)
Lexical Density: 56.20%
Fog Index: 6.93
deuces says
Total Word Count: 651
Total Unique Words: 365
Number of Sentences: 50
Average Sentence Length: 13.02
Number of Paragraphs: 14
Hard Words: 56 (8.60%)
Lexical Density: 56.07%
Fog Index: 8.65
"Hard words are defined as words with three or more syllables. This definition is used in calculating the readability and difficulty of a text, including the Gunning Fog Index"
"The Lexical Density Test is a Readability Test designed to show how easy or difficult a text is to read. As a guide, lexically dense text has a lexical density of around 60-70% and those which are not dense have a lower lexical density measure of around 40-50%."
"The Gunning Fog Index gives the number of years of education that your reader hypothetically needs to understand the paragraph or text. The Gunning Fog Index formula implies that short sentences written in plain English achieve a better score than long sentences written in complicated language.For reference, the New York Times has an average Fog Index of 11-12, Time magazine about 11. Typically, technical documentation has a Fog Index between 10 and 15, and professional prose almost never exceeds 18."
I ran it on a few random people asking for profile reviews and got
Total Word Count: 279
Total Unique Words: 189
Number of Sentences: 19
Average Sentence Length: 14.68
Number of Paragraphs: 6
Hard Words: 25 (8.96%) (what's this?)
Lexical Density: 67.74% (what's this?)
Fog Index: 9.46 (what's this?)
Total Word Count: 327
Total Unique Words: 203
Number of Sentences: 46
Average Sentence Length: 7.11
Number of Paragraphs: 5
Hard Words: 25 (7.65%) (what's this?)
Lexical Density: 62.08% (what's this?)
Fog Index: 5.90 (what's this?)
Total Word Count: 462
Total Unique Words: 245
Number of Sentences: 24
Average Sentence Length: 19.25
Number of Paragraphs: 6
Hard Words: 30 (6.49%) (what's this?)
Lexical Density: 53.03% (what's this?)
Fog Index: 10.30 (what's this?)
Total Word Count: 879
Total Unique Words: 439
Number of Sentences: 53
Average Sentence Length: 16.58
Number of Paragraphs: 13
Hard Words: 56 (6.37%) (what's this?)
Lexical Density: 49.94% (what's this?)
Fog Index: 9.18 (what's this?)
Total Word Count: 571
Total Unique Words: 330
Number of Sentences: 48
Average Sentence Length: 11.90
Number of Paragraphs: 10
Hard Words: 36 (6.30%) (what's this?)
Lexical Density: 57.79% (what's this?)
Fog Index: 7.28 (what's this?) | |
|
| Tick tock, the time has come! Grab your bibs and steak knives, and show me what you’re made of!
Posted: 6/25/2008 10:09:59 AM |
Bookrat said my initial profile looked staged and was a performance but this here what I have now looks like a performance to me.
Deuce, how many people have said exactly the same thing to you? I have seen dozens of responses to your comments saying that if they take your advice it won't feel like 'them' any more, or they will feel like they are lying.
Now, perhaps, you begin to empathize with them?
I also recall your responses being along the lines of, "Hey, you came to us and asked what we thought. We are the ones who have seen thousands of profiles, and we know what we're talking about. We're the experts. Listen to us or spend the remainder of your life 'holding your own cack'."
I told you what I perceived, based on my reading of your original profile. Other people backed up my perception, confirming that it was not just one man's opinion. Many people then gave advice on how to change the profile so that it would not give off that impression. You have taken it, I can truthfully say that this profile no longer produces those perceptions in my mind.
But if you don't like the advice, then don't take it! My only issue was that you were actively telling the people giving it to you that they were wrong in holding those opinions, which was in poor form.
I am going to repeat my words from earlier in the thread:
There's nothing technically wrong with this profile, Deuce, and if it's producing the results you want, then by all means keep it exactly as it is.
It's your profile, and you are not honour- or duty-bound to use the advice offered by anyone here.
If you like what you have ... then by all means keep it as-is
Nobody is making you change anything. If you plan to leave it as-is, though, or go back to how it was, then just be honest about it, thank everyone for their input, and let the thread die. But if you do want help, and are planning to take the advice and make the modifications, then why are you kvetching about both the process and now the results? | |
|
| Text statistics analyzer
Posted: 6/25/2008 10:15:03 AM | Duece don't look too dreadful compared with moi. (I stopped before reaching my own ASCII art.)
Total Word Count: 681
Total Unique Words: 386
Number of Sentences: 59
Average Sentence Length: 11.54
Number of Paragraphs: 12
Hard Words: 57 (8.37%)
Lexical Density: 56.68%
Fog Index: 7.96
usingenglish dot com resources text-statistics.php | |
|
| Text statistics analyzer
Posted: 6/25/2008 10:23:36 AM | Edit - don't want to derail the thread.
I'm just curious how the new profile is faring compared to the number/quality of previous responses? Duece? Can we celebrate yet? Wedding invitations? | |
|
| Text statistics analyzer
Posted: 6/25/2008 10:30:35 AM |
Duece don't look too dreadful compared with moi.
11.57 for mine? Compared to Duece's? Really?
As interesting as the statistics are (and thanks for the link, Vel) posting them risks derailing the thread.
Besides, if you're going to whip it out to compare it to Deuce's to see whose is bigger, you know who's going to win.  | |
|
| |
| |
| Tick tock, the time has come! Grab your bibs and steak knives, and show me what you’re made of!
Posted: 6/25/2008 12:26:48 PM |
Besides, if you're going to whip it out to compare it to Deuce's to see whose is bigger, you know who's going to win. I've never claimed to swing a big tool and in fact I've made light of my being "light" in the pants but I'm still going to win that fight based on compounding interests! ;-) Wait, are we talking about profiles now?
I don't see an ounce to truth to any of those figures calculated by those programs. Honestly, I think our profiles are written at a level SLIGHTLY higher than a 6th or 8th grader, and above the New York Times!
Is the new profile working for me? Compared to the original version I put up here not as well. Comparing it to many men's profiles I'm probably doing more than okay for myself but I've been disappointed actually with the turn-out based on this current version. So no, no proposals or offers to bear my illegitimate love child yet.
B, I highly doubt you've seen "dozens" of responses from people saying my suggestions would change the face of who they are on paper. I can think of 6 or 8 I'm sure but out of the 400-500+ profiles I've likely reviewed aloud that number is far from staggering. I took your advice. I took everyone's advice like a good OP. People have asked for progress reports and I'm simply stating where it's been. If some of you aren't okay with the fact that your changes have made things worse for my love life that's your burden to bear I suppose.
The intention of this thread was not to ensure I got hit by every heavy hitter out there but to give the people who we've helped and possibly upset over the months the chance to give back and take a crack at me. I don't need validation or justification for my profile. My inbox does that all on it's own. I thought someone said this in this thread but I can’t find it so maybe I read it elsewhere, or it was a vision, but when it comes to reviewing the reviewers it’s often best left in the hands of the common reader and not the critic. The profiles are too good generally and we pull out the big-boy combs and rip through it looking to make mountains out of molehills, and the eyes see what they want to see. It’s biased and unobjective. Unfortunately this thread didn’t garner the attention of those we’ve reviewed in the past all too much, aside from those who’ve graduated to reviewer status. Perhaps they are frightened of the potential repercussions?! LOL I don’t know. | |
|
| According to the formula...
Posted: 6/25/2008 2:29:23 PM | [ X ] "Who do you people think you are anyway? I don't need your help."
I don't need validation or justification for my profile.
[ X ] "I get lots of messages as it is."
My inbox does that all on it's own.
[ X ] "In fact, I've already met someone."
This profile, since setting it live today has already garnered me a meet and greet this evening.
[ _ ] User deletes profile, leaves site....
I keed, I keed! Don't do it, Deuce! We'd miss you! The similarities just struck me as funny.  | |
|
| Text analyser (should be analyZer! silly brits can't spell..)
Posted: 6/25/2008 4:19:08 PM | NEAT toy! Here it is, I'm whipping Mine out...
Total Word Count: 349
Total Unique Words: 235
Number of Sentences: 24
Average Sentence Length: 14.54
Number of Paragraphs: 6
Hard Words: 41 (11.75%) (what's this?)
Lexical Density: 67.34% (what's this?)
Fog Index: 10.52 (what's this?)
Looks like mine is geared towards a high-school junior (10.52)... I'd better tighten it up a notch or two.
-Chris | |
|
| Text analyser (should be analyZer! silly brits can't spell..)
Posted: 6/25/2008 5:07:10 PM | Looks like mine is geared towards a high-school junior (10.52)... I'd better tighten it up a notch or two.
Im not sure the gearings are really the same in this environment. Profiles are lot less formal than NY times articles after all. I think a good profile is written more like one talks or thinks than a factual piece of text and If you were to analyse speech I think it would be lower down on the scale.
I think the differences in the fog index between say 5, 7 & 10 do highlight something important about the nature of a profile. | |
|
| |
| Text analyser (should be analyZer! silly brits can't spell..)
Posted: 6/25/2008 6:53:01 PM | OK, Bro, embarrassing truth here; unless I am intentionally TRYING to talk at the vernacular level, this is actually how I speak. I have many times been accused of being a bit, ummm... "highbrow"... to be polite.
I learned early on that to do so in the wrong company would cause my nose to bleed, or my lunch money to mysteriously vanish, so I became capable of speaking several languages and MANY English dialects. However, unless I am putting on an act, or trying to cultivate, say, a business contact,or talking to a mechanic, or a plumber, or a doctor, or any other sort of technician, I tend to speak in an encyclopaedic fashion. (Again, a euphemism more polite than the descriptions I have received from others.)
I have to question myself, though, since I know that the few times I have been REALLY angry, I tended to speak very emotionally, and in a fashion reminiscent of growing up in the Annandale Projects in Washington DC. Go figure.
Why am I telling you this? Probably because of this wonderful glass of Merlot I am slowly infusing into my system... :)
Thanks again for all your feedback; I now have the near-perfect profile. Now, if I was only half as attractive as you (said in a strictly heterosexual, admiring, slightly jealous fashion) I would be in luck! :)
-Chris | |
|
| |
| |
| |
Home
login 
