|
|
|
|
|
| |
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/2/2012 6:59:13 PM | To the OP...because even in this day in age, women still enjoy having a man make the first move. It makes us feel desirable and attractive. If you made a site where women had to make the first move, you would find it going out of service/business quickley.
All you'd end up with is a room full of men, scratching their heads and drinking ale wondering why the ladies aren't flooding in to meet them.
Exactly!!!!
And again to the OP...you mention alot about women wanting to 'take control'. I hate to break it to you, but as I said above...dating is the one area where women still expect a man to take initiative and pursue us. Not the other way around. Women don't want to have to control the emailing/initiating and risk the rejection. We are quite happy being the ones with the surplus of options. And yes, lol, I know that sounded horrible. I could lie, but why? | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/2/2012 7:22:04 PM | As many have pointed out, OP's original suggestion just won't work.
But what has worked at some other dating sites I've been on is not allowing either party to message the other party until both parties have agreed to communicate with each other.
This actually does prevent women from being bombarded with emails, and more importantly, from receiving a bunch of emails from men they find "gross" for whatever reason. It also substantially cuts down on the rude and lewd emails they receive, just by virtue of the fact that they generally only allow a small percentage of men to email them period (think of it as everybody is blocked from emailing everybody in the beginning, then you have to unblock those you actually wish to hear from).
The advantage to men is that they don't have to waste God knows how many hours constructing personal emails for every woman they find attractive, only to receive a 1-5% response rate (and some of those just "thanks, but no thanks"). The only women you can email are the ones that have already indicated that they find you interesting (based on profile and pictures).
I've actually gotten the vast majority of dates in my life from sites like that. On such sites, I might have to write (or only be able to write) 1 or 2 first contact emails a week, but there was generally a 90%+ chance she was going to respond since she had already indicated interest, so I put my all into it and was generally rewarded. When I first joined POF (my God, 5 year anniversary coming up in a matter of days!), I tried to use the same strategy on this site as those sites, but writing a maximum of 40 "brilliant" and unique messages a day to women who I had no idea if they had any interest in me became so taxing that POF practically became my fourth job. And just like a real job, it was a lot of hard work with hardly any pay. It took a few years, but POF actually broke my spirit. I've almost never quit at anything in my entire life, even when I realized the odds were insurmountable. But after sending out a couple thousand first contact POF emails during my first 3-4 years, I now may send out a couple a month, with about the same amount of responses (almost none) and the same amount of dates (none). This game's just too hard for somebody with my personal stats. And more importantly, too inefficient. Definitely don't let anybody here fool you: there is no email or profile brilliant enough to make you attractive to someone who is visually repulsed by you.
All that said, I doubt POF could function in the manner of those other sites, which were all paid (in the best case scenarios, one way, like "ladies night" at bar -- that is, only one person needed a paid membership for both to communicate completely -- and it almost always was the guy who paid for the membership, obviously). As a mostly ad-supported site, POF thrives on page views, and far less page views are generated when both parties have to agree to communicate before emails can be sent (although arguably, the process of agreeing to communicate itself takes a few page views).
I'm just pointing out that it's possible for a site to fix the problems the OP claims to be concerned with (and the actual problems he IS concerned with) without having to force women to send the first message. But it won't be happening at POF. | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/3/2012 5:03:10 AM | HAHAHAHA! What an amusing idea! And here out of all places! I just love the notion of supply and demand. Females are products that men need to possess! hahaha! Aren't we suppose to be equals in this mess of a social structure? True capitalism in relationships and gender relations mixed in with 'equal opportunities' is very amusing.
Author. If you are desperate enough to use this site, use and abuse the system anyway you can to stay ahead. That's the rules here. | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/3/2012 5:12:51 AM | The problem in your line of thought is that even if you came up with some goofy way to encourage more women to make first contact that just means they would all be contacting the same top 10 or 20 percent of the men here not you.
POF cant make anyone contact YOU.
Your the problem in this equation actually. Work on your pics and profile. Thats how you get more messages here.
Cowboy | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/3/2012 7:27:46 AM | Statistically, men do message first. Successful men do mass message many women.
In the same way that women can be 'just not interested' we have every reason to be not interested in investing a large portion of time into messaging someone we've never spoken to and in 80-90% likeliness isn't going to respond.
While I have little to say to the specific people in this thread, my general attitude towards men & women of the internet is: get over yourself. Everyone acts with the same silly drama about how others treat them badly.
Until you've established a connection with someone, you are strangers, and are less inclined to being understanding or friendly with each other. If a girl gives me shitty attitude, I'm not interested. I'm sure its the same for most of you. Just try to be aware that you're probably being just as terrible to them as they are to you.
I wouldn't mind a cookie for every message I send out. | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/3/2012 10:32:17 AM | "And your basing this statement on you and your friends? Thats not an accurate study."
Actually, there's another dating website (Rival of POF) that has done studies on this. The blog entries show that men send about 75% of the first messages. Obviously, I can't link to it, but I'm sure you can find what I'm talking about.
As long as women keep getting gems like these from men, they won't send out the first message.
"ur hot"
"how r u"
"dam gurl u z fyne"
"wats good ma"
"u sho' is purty"
"B*tch you is fine as hell"
"how are you"
"how's it going"
I swear, 90% of the men on POF are retarded. | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/3/2012 2:31:34 PM | "how are you"
"how's it going"
I don't know: I had a friend on here once upon a time that pretty much sent out nothing more than that and got more than 50% response rates, which for young men on here, is pretty darn impressive. But then again, he's 6'2" and a former college baseball player who currently works as an investment portfolio manager. So maybe it isn't that amazing.
But with that in mind, I'm inclined to agree with what Cowboy said (as opposed to what he might have meant): "You're the problem in this equation actually." As in, it generally doesn't matter what you write -- if the person you're writing to is attracted to you, he/she will probably respond, and if he/she doesn't, it's probably because... you're not attractive. To them.
Unless you write something REALLY stupid, like those first 6 examples from LS. Well, I say it's stupid -- I've actually seen quite a few women's profiles on here that would suggest they would respond positively to that stuff. IF the guy was attractive. To them. Hell, I've RECEIVED a couple of first contact emails from women that said crap like that. Which just proves women can be as stupid as men on here. What in my profile would suggest I am anything like that? But what makes me different from all the women receiving such lame intros is that, in all honesty, had those women writing badly to me been even REMOTELY attractive, I would have likely pursued the interest. Because quite frankly, I don't have a lot of options and really don't give much of a damn about my potential dates' creative writing skills. Seriously, when you meet someone attractive at a bar or church or on the street or at a wedding, do you immediately ask them to give you a writing sample? Of course not. Then why the hell do you care here? I'm obviously an educated and skilled writer, but all 3 women I had year+ relationships with were terrible writers (well, I'm assuming in one case, since I can't recall her ever writing anything at all, not even a phone text). Video profiles might be a better way to go with this place.
I mean, all that really matters in dating is attraction. Someone here will declare otherwise, but if you're not attracted to someone that you have everything in the world in common with, I bet you a million dollars that person is just a friend. The extra effort of sending out first contact emails that rival Shakespearean sonnets is quite pointless... even to a woman who lists "Shakespeare" among her interests. And although I'm certain even the most eligible bachelor in the world can shoot himself in the foot ON OCCASION with weak writing skills, I find it very difficult to believe those who claim someone's strong writing skills will change physical repulsion to attraction.
SW: "In the same way that women can be 'just not interested' we have every reason to be not interested in investing a large portion of time into messaging someone we've never spoken to and in 80-90% likeliness isn't going to respond." Agree with this 100%, neighbor. Most women have much higher response rates when they attempt first contacts and don't get that at all. Ignoring forumites, I imagine the typical woman spends a very small fraction of the amount of time on this site that the typical man does, since it takes far less time to "read/delete" than it does to construct a personalized email (which is why "How's it going?" isn't necessarily the world's worst idea). | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/3/2012 3:09:24 PM |
"And your basing this statement on you and your friends? Thats not an accurate study."
Exactly.
If you and your pals are wordsmiths, all I can say is "Thank God!", but most aren't.
As long as women keep getting gems like these from men, they won't send out the first message.
Actually, for me.. that's exactly WHY I send some messages. Hoping like hell the reply, assuming one even comes is intelligent. But my thing with sending messages is that I only do it when a guy's profile really jumps out at me. So I don't send a lot. If I had to average it out, I'd guess I send maybe 2 per month.
Honestly, I think men ought to do the same. Hold out for something that really captures their attention. I do realize that there are probably a percentage of men here who do just that.
if the person you're writing to is attracted to you, he/she will probably respond, and if he/she doesn't, it's probably because... you're not attractive. To them.
Bingo!
The extra effort of sending out first contact emails that rival Shakespearean sonnets is quite pointless... even to a woman who lists "Shakespeare" among her interests.
I would be impressed, but as you say.. if I am not attracted to him... nothin. | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/3/2012 5:03:21 PM | My personal experience is I try to get to know women on a friendly bases and start from there. I have been sincere in reading profiles and not getting responses. Sometimes, a nice, thanks but I am not interested is actually quite reassuring.
I made a friend out of a woman the other day cause she felt I was too youn gofr her but found out we both get along. I just think women window shop too much here when a man makes a sincere message versus, "how are you" or "babe, how big is your bewbies", which is a understandable reason not to respond.
The huge problem is you wouldn't believe how many women here window shop and put a text restriction to a limit. It is ridiculous when a woman thinks that by asking interested men to make a long and thoughtful message that she shouldn't at least respond in a way. I guarantee you that a "I am not interested" will go a long way. If he responds negatively after that, then you see how much his character was worth.
But hey, that is just me. | |
|
| |
| |
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/5/2012 12:48:53 PM |
if the person you're writing to is attracted to you, he/she will probably respond, and if he/she doesn't, it's probably because... you're not attractive. To them.
Not necessarily. It's very possible that she's attracted to you, but she found 10 other guys out of the other 40 messages that were sent to her that are much MORE attractive. You'd think online dating would make things easier for everybody, but honestly, it makes it much harder for men because men do most of the initial messaging which means you have to compete with every guy that messages the same women you message.
The way I see it, if you don't use online dating, you have less options, but you have much less competition since you can only pursue people that you've met in person at least once which is in a much smaller area (your town or county). Once you get online though, you have more options, but are likely competing with many more people in a much wider area (your entire state). | |
|
| |
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/5/2012 1:59:17 PM |
Okay men do the majority of first time messaging. Why not make it so women are encourage to message first. Maybe not allow men to do so at all,or as frequently. If men could only reply or send,for example 3 starting messages a day,it would mean women search.
The result of this would be a mass exit of people to other sites.
Though that said, I can assure you women send many first contact messages.
Im fed up of getting very few messages and having to search all the time
If you are finding it too hard, then just give up. | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/9/2012 12:48:00 PM | | I know I am probably a dinosaur...but in my era, the man always made the first move. Sometimes women are shy or liked to be pursued (but not stalked) or maybe they are a little short on self-esteem. One woman told me that if she had to make the first move that she figured the guy was not man enough for her. | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/10/2012 3:48:54 PM | I quite enjoyed reading this post and agree with the last post.
I don't want to HAVE to email someone, especially just because its a new change in shift. I also agree that there are alot of profiles that I have seen which are terrible. No thought put into a description, pics are with sunglasses on, sloppy cloths, workout wear, blurry pics, muscle pics, etc,. Out of courtesy I do write back to say that I'm not interested however sometimes I feel its just not worth a response. I'm here to find someone at my own pace and not to feel pressured to do so. You just may lose some people here in the process.
I hear what you're saying but I have to disagree with your suggestion.
D | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/11/2012 3:49:47 AM | Yes please for the love of God, don't make women have to actually do something, its bad enough they have to NOT respond.
Like I said at OKC, online women are not really here to date, if they were the same women wouldn't be on every single day.
The only way to be really successful at this besides mass carpet bombing of messages is pay attention to who is online when you are. If you keep seeing the same women online, don't waste your time messaging them, they're looking for Mr. Right who doesn't exist, or are beyond socially inept and couldn't carry a bucket of water, let alone a conversation.
Your best bet is getting a new face online, and sending a couple sentences her way, most of my success has come from women who aren't here window shopping, but who actually want to meet people; its rare but it does happen. | |
|
| |
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/16/2012 2:24:08 PM | GFTLimes
I think that you are SO correct. Most Brit wmn are lazy, all they can do is demand things they want from men - they never bother to say what they can bring to the Party.
I went to Holland in the early 1970s - went to a normal night club - got asked so many times to dance by women !
If you tried that in UK, you'd be sat on your bum all night. Yes NOW in 2012 for men of my age - late 60s.
The best you get is a couple of Viewings, you write, and get B'r all reply 75% 0f the time !
And why are all these 65 y o High School wmn looking for 45 y o Toy Boys, but moaning on about not wanting 1 nite stands - what they think their gonna get from a 45 y o ?
Back to the treadmill ! | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 4/18/2012 8:41:09 PM | LMAOOOO ^^^ hehehe treadmill.
I only message men I'm attracted to and I don't give a hoot about who chases who. Come on, we're as dumb as each other at the end of the day. Women on here will never be able to reply to the amount of messages recieved on here. I apologise on behalf of myself and every other women that doesn't reply to all of them. But I can bet the majority do want to say thanks but know thanks, but don't want to hurt the other person even more then being silent would. You guys complaining would be exactly the same way, so don't point fingers. Get the hint if there is no response and move on. Who cares. | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 7/19/2012 7:12:40 PM |
Last I looked, I think women have the control when it comes to online dating.
In fact, I suspect your suggestion would take away some of the control we have by trying to force us to contact men. As it is, we contact who we want to contact and respond to who we want to respond to.
I don't quite get how your suggestion would be giving us more control than we already have.
I hate to admit it, But you're right. But even worse, The reason you're right is men's fault. You see, The great majority of men have given up there control. They have given it up by how they do. I'm one of the more successful men here. I've gotten plenty of dates here. Yes, I've had some to ignore me. But I've had more to answer me than ignore me. I know that some of it is how I write. How I carry myself in my messages to these women.
I think the main reason I've been more successful, I don't chase skirts. I write very few. I'm selective. I'm a little bit picky. I read profiles. I know my limits. I know my strength's, and my weaknesses. I don't believe in the "shot-gun" approach. I don't write 50 generic notes and fire them off at every woman I see.
Most men's worst enemy is themselves. Most still run around with there dic% in their hand looking for a place to stick it. If they would train themselves to stop thinking with their dik, Think with the brain between their ears, Not the one swinging between their legs, They would get farther. They would take back the power they lost.
I know this is the reason women in general get curious about me. They want to go out with me. I'm different. I don't need a woman to complete me. I am comfortable with myself. I'm not the least desperate for a woman.
Most men running around now have no control over themselves. They seem to think that every woman they meet is a potential fuc%. Men have done this to themselves. I took back my power many yrs ago. I haven't had a problem getting a woman since. When men in general finally wake up and realize that for the most part, Women either want what they can't have, Or the one who doesn't come easy, There dating life will get better. Until then they will keep starting cry baby threads like this one and go to bed wondering why Mary and her five-finger friends is all they have. | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 7/20/2012 7:02:24 AM | The biggest trouble is that for all the talk of equality when it comes to dating females haven't really progressed from the stone age. The expectation is still to wait around to be clubbed over the head and dragged back to the cave! It's double standards and it's not fair on men, but it's the way it is, and unless we have some kind of plague spread by drinking beer and watching sports that wipes out half the population of males it's always going to be the way.
For what it's worth the OPs idea has a some merit, could get men to concentrate a little harder on getting their profile and pics straight. Unfortunately the reality is that there would just be more grumbling on the forums! | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 7/20/2012 7:16:59 AM |
For what it's worth the OPs idea has a some merit, No it was a ridiculous rant from another frustrated male. Even if POF gave cash bonuses to women sending messages they cant make a woman MESSAGE YOU. Thats why the whole idea is beyond flawed.
could get men to concentrate a little harder on getting their profile and pics straight. Oh give me a break. If they wont work on their pics and profile now based on the fact they get no replies they are hopeless. Women DO make first contact. I get first contact emails here almost every single day and I am VERY average looking. I usually get 1 to 3 a day. I got 14 three days ago. Heck I had three this morning between 1 am and 4 am. All this BS about women never make first contact is bologna. They do. They are not contacting YOU and the only thing that will change that is YOU putting up a better profile and pics. Why so many cant grasp that concept is beyond me. There is no way POF can make more women contact YOU.
WOMEN DO send first contact messages now. They send them to guys with interesting profiles that they find attractive. Making women send 20 first contact messages a day here will help me TONS as they are already messaging me. And I will probably get TONS more in that situation. Guys that are not getting replies or messages now wont get any if POF forced every woman to send 10 a day. Because the women are all going to be sending the same small group of guys getting messages now even more messages. Sheeesh
Cowboy | |
|
| why not put more emphasis on women messaging men?
Posted: 7/20/2012 11:46:34 AM | But what has worked at some other dating sites I've been on is not allowing either party to message the other party until both parties have agreed to communicate with each other.
I gotta say...this idea has merit and is something I would pay for. I don't see any downsides and would eliminate the majority, if not all, of the complaints about who messages who first, why don't they respond, messages from undesirables, etc. Half the functionality is already implemented (block/unblock), just need to implement a green/red icon to indicate your current status with that person. How do we get this idea to Markus?
| |
|
|
|
Home
login 
