| |
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/23/2009 1:45:30 PM | op, the real issue is you're not connecting with women, and you're looking for any reason to vent. ok. you've vented. feel better?
cuz dude, you and the rest of the guys crying on this thread about how women write emails, nobody cares about your problems - the real one of which is, you invest expectations in women you know nothing about, those expectations get even more inflated in the moment you see that first or second response in your inbox, and then you come crashing to earth when you realize she wants nothing to do with you. that's about you, not her. move on to the next one. | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/23/2009 1:51:36 PM | op david is right..
Now quit crying like a little girl and stop wearing underoos..time for some big boy pants.
If they were blocking you would be venting about that.
You just want it and want it now..Stamps foot.  | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/23/2009 2:17:07 PM |
OP: I doubt it's the education system in the USA vs. no interest in you.
Exactly.
Yes there are people who don't grasp that this is a text oriented medium, and as such those who can communicate better will have an easier time with it. I believe you should choose your environment by what your strong suits are. If you're better in person - then go do this in person. Simple enough.
You don't get it. Receiving lame two word responses after sending a thoughtful message to someone just irritates us. We know the woman is not interested after two or three of those. Either don't respond or show some courtesy and just write "thanks for the message, but I'm not interested." Is that so difficult?
You don't get it actually - the point is not interested is not interested REGARDLESS of the form it comes in. You'll never get all women to respond the way you want, it's a battle you'll never win. It's easier to just recognize the signs of lack of interest and move on.
I get messaged a lot by guys who don't read the profile and start chatting with me - I assume everyone who sends a message did so based on reading my profile since the profile is where it's supposed to begin, so I never assume random chatting is interest. If it is, this isn't my problem, unless they specifically address it in their message. If they do, then I clearly respond to it.
And for those who message or approach a woman and don't have anything to say - don't do it. If you approach you are the one who should be offering conversation that they respond to. Thinking that walking up and asking someone else if they want to chat when it's clear you are the one who does is lazy and passing the buck...initiate and direct the conversation with some sort of dialogue. | |
|
| |
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/23/2009 3:26:06 PM | You don't get it actually - the point is not interested is not interested REGARDLESS of the form it comes in. You'll never get all women to respond the way you want, it's a battle you'll never win. It's easier to just recognize the signs of lack of interest and move on.
See, that's the problem. Why not just be direct instead of jerking us around? It takes very little effort for the woman to respond, but it takes time for some of us to read through the profile and write an introductory message. Why waste our time and leave the burden on us to try to figure out whether you're interested or not? Some of us know only through experience what her interest level is and whether we should continue communication. Other guys are just clueless. | |
|
| |
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/23/2009 4:20:11 PM |
See, that's the problem. Why not just be direct instead of jerking us around?
It's only a problem for people who realize that anything but a clear yes is usually a no.
It takes very little effort for the woman to respond, but it takes time for some of us to read through the profile and write an introductory message.
It takes no less time for a woman to read an opening message, refer to a profile and decide to respond than it does for a guy to read a profile and write based on it (unless you're a slow typer or you're opening with War and Peace, that is - if so, shorten your message and/or frequent non typing environments when dating).
Why waste our time and leave the burden on us to try to figure out whether you're interested or not?
Above is the key question for your whole issue. To address that, if you feel it's wasting your time and burdensome, why bother? This is dating, not obstacle course grading. You don't have to participate if you don't like the process. You're not going to change it by giving lectures on how women should respond.
Some of us know only through experience what her interest level is and whether we should continue communication. Other guys are just clueless.
Yes, exactly. Men who are more clueless are bound to be more frustrated. It's possible to hone conversational skills, take this whole thing LESS personally, look primarily offline and only come here to supplement offline dating, and realize that anything you're not sure about is usually not interest. | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/23/2009 4:24:16 PM | It takes very little effort for the woman to respond, but it takes time for some of us to read through the profile and write an introductory message.
since you're making energy expenditure an issue, consider that the women you want most to respond usually have overflowing inboxes. if they were to write polite responses to every guy who didn't cut-and-paste, they'd be spending a significant chunk of their online time on dead-end courtesy communication rather than actually working toward meeting men - which is why they're here.
it's work to make it work. no shortcuts for anyone.
If you approach you are the one who should be offering conversation that they respond to.
cuts both ways, WIP. i've gotten approaches that were no more than 'hello handsome!' and 'hi. debbie.' | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/23/2009 7:57:46 PM | | OP - this is not a gender issue.... or an education issue.... or an age issue. I have had men do this same thing to me... young - old.... educated - uneducated.... it makes no matter. I personally think it is more related to their emotional intelligence and their personal level of self-respect than anything else. If you have a high level of self-respect, you won't represent yourself in such an unfavourable light. I just answer "not interested" and move on.... they aren't putting any effort into communicating - I see no reason for me to put in more.... especially when they are the ones making initial contact. | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/23/2009 8:32:56 PM |
Ok, I've been using online dating for about a couple of month and seriously is the education system in the U.S. this bad.
Check the spelling, grammar, and sentence structure of most of the posters. Or the capacity for critical thinking, grasp of basic science principles, basic knowledge of history.
I think there's plenty of evidence that the education system really is this bad. I also think a lot of it is laziness. Don't let that drag you down, though. There are intelligent, thoughtful people in the world who will be interested in conversing with you. When you find them, enjoy them, because they are hard to find.
Good luck. You sound like an interesting lad. | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/23/2009 9:19:49 PM | There are people out there who don't talk much. Some reasons might be:
1. They responded to be polite but have no interest in the other person. Hence they give you the hint or just want to come out cold so you get the hint.
OR
2. They really are not easy with starting conversations nevermind trying to keep up with one.
Solution: Move on to the person you think can keep up with your conversation requirement.
Never ever have expectations from people you don't know. This way you won't be disappointment. Everyone does things their way which might not always suit us. Go with the flow and let things happen. | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/23/2009 9:31:03 PM | cuts both ways, WIP. i've gotten approaches that were no more than 'hello handsome!' and 'hi. debbie.'
Of course it does. I wouldn't dream of approaching someone and expecting them to carry my azz in a conversation. If I did, I'd expect them to dismiss me. If I am the one who wants to talk, I should be the one who initiates the flow of it and brings the content. | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/24/2009 6:45:02 AM | | This is very true, they are giving you a hint. I do hate when a girl email me for the first time, because she is interested in me, but only writes "what is up" | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/24/2009 7:28:35 AM | OP, nobody forced you to live in US. If you don't like the people here. Move away.
A whiny crying boy isn't fun.
OP, you're only 20. You should get out and have some fun with real girls in real world.
A tip, there are many cute girls in the art museum. | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/24/2009 5:27:35 PM | | I don't think age has anything to do with it. I've had men in their 40's and 50's respond back with one or two words... or, don't even address the question at all. That's why there is a beautiful little key called "Delete". If you get too many of these from the same person, do yourself a favor and move on. It may take you a year to get a full sentence out of them! | |
|
| |
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/25/2009 1:49:32 PM | I think that people who eat fruit & veg at least as part of their life usually can communicate without talking like their texting
Doesn't need a degree, just a little a effort & a little attitude to learn in life
~sc~ | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/25/2009 2:05:45 PM |
I think all the guys in this thread should open a "...why don't women respond...?" thread and tell them to stop posting with complaints about women who respond because it's causing you to get half azz responses from uninterested women.
Make up your minds, dudes!
When we respond politely though uninterested, we're leading men on. When we don't respond at all we're rude and inconsiderate of the time and effort it took to put together a "thoughtful e-mail". Pick one and be done with it.
That's not really fair. Just because males say one thing, and males say another thing, doesn't mean it's ALL males saying both things. There ARE different groups of people within the same gender that feel different ways about the topic. You can't make such a sweeping generalization, just as many women would be offended if somebody tried to make one about the female population as a whole.
Also, I think that it's pretty simple to send a note saying "Thank you for your time and attention, but after reading your profile, I'm just not interested. Good luck in your search."
That being said, I think it's generally accepted on here that no reply means no interest. Replying with 2-word emails is infuriating. | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/25/2009 2:23:53 PM | Yes, simple as that.
No reply = no interest, which is fine. Some idiots will keep sending stupid messages (why aren't you replying?) but that's the minority. You can't blame either men or women for the minority of stupid people in each gender.
Message back saying "Sorry, but not interested" = no interest, which is fine. Some idiots will reply back saying "why?? What's wrong with me" but that's the minority.
Messages back such as "lol yeah" or "for sure" are simply a waste of time for both the sender and receiver and should not be done.
Why are people arguing this? There is NO benefit to such actions, but there is harm.
How can people argue in favour of actions that have no benefits and only harm? | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/25/2009 3:07:36 PM |
That's not really fair. Just because males say one thing, and males say another thing, doesn't mean it's ALL males saying both things. There ARE different groups of people within the same gender that feel different ways about the topic. You can't make such a sweeping generalization, just as many women would be offended if somebody tried to make one about the female population as a whole.
Exactly. And when I see a thread saying all women say this and then do that, I realize that while each is probably a different group (or just hearsay), that the bottom line is the answer isn't interpreting how people do what they do but what the big picture is. And the big picture usually is that the person making the statement isn't focusing on the right thing.
Here, the focus should not be how women respond or what they say, so much as what the result is. Interested or not? That's it. Because you'll never get a million women to respond to an e-mail the same way (nevermind the fact that less than 1% of this site even knows there IS a forums section nevermind learning anything from reading it OR caring that there's anything to learn).
Also, I think that it's pretty simple to send a note saying "Thank you for your time and attention, but after reading your profile, I'm just not interested. Good luck in your search."
It's even simpler to send a note saying "no thanks" or to not respond at all or delete the message. All that matters is unless a woman clearly shows interest and makes an effort to take things further, it's lack of interest. The outcome is the focus, not the form of communication.
That being said, I think it's generally accepted on here that no reply means no interest. Replying with 2-word emails is infuriating.
Both are either non interest, or signs that someone's not a match for you. These are people you don't know and don't need to get upset about. There are women who respond with two words in public also, maybe it's their body language that helps determine the lack of interest in that case.
No reply = no interest, which is fine. Some idiots will keep sending stupid messages (why aren't you replying?) but that's the minority. You can't blame either men or women for the minority of stupid people in each gender.
It's a minority here, yes - on the other side of the site where most tend to stay, it's more common than you think. The combination of people who either want to insult cause they don't like the response, ignore the response, or try to negotiate are not usually the people who post in forums.
Message back saying "Sorry, but not interested" = no interest, which is fine. Some idiots will reply back saying "why?? What's wrong with me" but that's the minority.
Again, here - yes it is.
Messages back such as "lol yeah" or "for sure" are simply a waste of time for both the sender and receiver and should not be done.
Car theft shouldn't be done. How useful is making that statement? Car thieves don't care what we think they should do, nor are they often anywhere that they'd hear us if it did matter.
Why are people arguing this? There is NO benefit to such actions, but there is harm. How can people argue in favour of actions that have no benefits and only harm?
The argument isn't that any one thing is right - it's that you cannot control what others do. It's better to take the message they are trying to convey and move on than it is to get bogged down in how they deliver the message. Granted it's easy to get confused when you have interest in someone and you WANT them to be interested, but mutual interest is usually not that vague. | |
|
| |
| |
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/25/2009 3:32:52 PM | When my dad was alive he told me many wise things...
Never use more words than you need to say what you want to say. You write a thoughtful and long message to someone and they reply with 'ok', they told you precisely without convoluting anything 'Not interested'. Which is more or less impressive? Their using one word replies or you not understanding what they really said? | |
|
| People With No Conversation Skills
Posted: 10/25/2009 5:08:00 PM | "The argument isn't that any one thing is right - it's that you cannot control what others do. It's better to take the message they are trying to convey and move on than it is to get bogged down in how they deliver the message. Granted it's easy to get confused when you have interest in someone and you WANT them to be interested, but mutual interest is usually not that vague"
Logical fallacy.
You are saying "since we cannot control what people do, we cannot condemn the actions they take."
We can and do.
We're not talking about what actions people are going to do. We're talking about the fact that the action of sending two word replies is an action that should be condemned by everyone because it has no benefits and only harm (wasted time) for all parties concerned.
You are talking about being confused whether there is interest or not—that is irrelevant. That is not what we are discussing.
We are discussing "why do people send two-word replies since such actions are pointless?"
You only have two options here: agree that such replies are pointless and should not occur, or defend such replies and give a reason to support their existence. | |
|
Home
login 
