| A lesson from networking advice
Posted: 4/8/2009 7:07:24 AM | A good rule of thumb for networking (this is in the context of establishing business relationships but I think it applies here as well) is that you must reach out 6-7 times to a particular person before a "relationship" is established. We live in a crowded, busy world today and people have so much else going on and so many others demanding their attention. So why does the attitude that once or twice is enough prevail on here? Consider yourself the receiver... wouldn't you much more likely respond to someone who's message and profile you've seen come over several times? I know I would. I consider them more serious and it begins to seem like they are more interested in me and not just casting a wide net and seeing what they catch with it. So why give up if you've tried only 1 or 2 times?
And why do we assume that a "relationship" could possibly exist with only 1 short message? I can't tell you the number of times I'm asked for my personal email address or a suggestion is made that we chat on IM when all I know is that they think we have some things in common and I've got some basic BIO! Totally defeats the purpose of this site in my opinion. What is so wrong with taking advantage of the security of this site and conversing here for awhile? It seems as good as my personal inbox and then your messages don't get mixed in with all the spam and potentially lost. Do we just play by such different rules that it is almost hopeless that we will ever connect? Or are we all just in such a hurry that we've decided the thoughtful, conservative methods (true "courting") just don't apply in today's world? | |
|
| A lesson from networking advice
Posted: 4/8/2009 10:22:42 AM | I think the OP raises some valid questions even though I'm not sure if business networking advice translates exactly for purely social networking. What exactly constitutes a "relationship" , and what sort of "relationship" is required to, say, meet for coffee? Years ago, people met and "courted" in the social context of their families and communities. Present day communities are much more fluid, and we all believe that we are all entitled to a lot more "privacy"(or anonymity) than our anscestors did.
What would make the original Post a "Troll Post"? | |
|
| A lesson from networking advice
Posted: 4/8/2009 11:30:28 AM | I'm with ya all the way OP. I go slow. I send long emails and ask a LOT of questions. I don't go to IM my next step would be the phone and I just don't go there if things are not looking and sounding very strong online first. Some on here are in a huge hurry to meet and see if thee is "chemistry".
I can tell a LOT from a series on serious messages that are honestly trying to find out about each other to see if its even worth meeting.
Cowboy | |
|
| A lesson from networking advice
Posted: 4/8/2009 8:02:06 PM | | This is interesting. I didn't realise that it took more than a few contacts for a relationship to be established but it makes an awful lot of sense. I find that in social groups where there is occasional contact, it takes about a year for me to feel that we have become friends who trust each other. In fact, in real life it takes much more than 7 contacts. Often, by the time I feel I trust and know someone I've met online to the extent that I'd like to meet them in person, they've lost interest. Mostly, I felt it was best to wait until some kind of 'relationship' was established, but I kick myself sometimes that I didn't just jump at an opportunity or I regret that the other person wasn't more patient. Of course, sometimes online one just feels there is no real connection from the start; it just all feels like hard work. When that is the case, there seems to be no point making the effort because something is failing somewhere between the two of you. I recently chatted to someone who started out very enthusastic then quickly fell into monosyllabic responses. He also took too long to respond when chatting on IM and then said it was because he'd been doing something else! When I decided there was no point chatting any longer because he was making no effort and clearly putting other things first, he was amazed as he thought we were getting on really well! Well, no, not really. | |
|
| A lesson from networking advice
Posted: 4/9/2009 8:04:39 AM | Greetigs:
S&S11, I understand your analogy and concept, and how it might pertain to PoF, but don't you think there are some fundamental differences between the two that limit the analogy? For instance, in the business world more often than not there is something tangible and real the parties are interested in around which a "relationship" can be built. Whether it be something physical, like a tractor, or a service, like lodging, the parties have something real to cement the relationship.
Further, in the real world there are concrete expressions of the "relationship." Whether we trade, barter, or purchase there is always something of value being offered.
In the PoF world, we have none of that. Because of the anonymity of this "world" until the parties meet there is nothing of value. Whether the parties exchange one message or one hundred until that initial flesh and blood meet the parties have nothing of substance on which to base a relationship. As has been pointed out to the nth degree people are often not what they manifest: between age and weight disception many mislead in the hope that all will be forgiven when they finally meet IRL.
The problem is that in the real world such a deception may be actionable as fraud where in this imaginary world no such punitive measures occur.
While I agree that getting to know one another though the PoF mail system is a good idea, I harbor no such notion that a relationship is created until I have met the other person in the real world or something close to real.
Now with that said, as I said in another post, the beauty of PoF is that we can at least get to know the other person, to the extent they want to be known, through their profile and through their posts in the forums. I like that. A charade can only be successful for so long - sooner or later a person will trip up and be exposed as a buffoon.
Blessings,
and may this Easter be a joyous one for you and your family,
TK | |
|
| A lesson from networking advice
Posted: 4/10/2009 1:31:29 AM | you crack me up OP; you have a picture of yourself in a miniskirt on a horse and then in a bathing suit and you are self righteously getting on people for not being conservative? lol
this is the internet; there are no set rules; just like in real life it takes some people a long time to get to know eachother, some less.
The internet has also created a society where many people; especially under 35, haven't a clue as to how to act in public; they are direct, are "open books" and have no boundaries.
Again, if this is your main dating tool, I think it's very foolish; the internet is not the ideal place to meet someone; not in the least; and you should expect crazy and aggressive behavior at times on the net; it's how people are. It's strange but it's the way it is. | |
|
| A lesson from networking advice
Posted: 4/11/2009 10:16:59 AM | Well, I disagree with the expectation of crazy and aggressive behaviour simply because it is the internet, but I just want to clarify something.
Does that mean I should follow up on my e-mail to that special woman in my POF life? I always thought that writing 6-7 e-mails without reply would make me a bit of an e-stalker, or at least a pain. Perhaps, though, I'm giving up too quickly.
I also don't see that a relationship is formed via e-mail. I truly believe that the seeds of a social relationship are there, but that relationship has not really grown yet. In fact, I would say that can be the downfall of so many of us on POF - assuming that e-mail communication constitutes a relationship and then finding all the relationships very thin.
I do like your comments, OP, from the perspective of being persistant. I had never seen e-mail communications this way, but if that is what you are suggesting, then thanks for the heads up. I mean that. (but, of course, I have to say that I mean that because you could not hear the intonation in my voice!) | |
|
| A lesson from networking advice
Posted: 4/11/2009 11:45:16 AM | SeaandSun11 said:
A good rule of thumb for networking (this is in the context of establishing business relationships but I think it applies here as well) is that you must reach out 6-7 times to a particular person before a "relationship" is established. We live in a crowded, busy world today and people have so much else going on and so many others demanding their attention. So why does the attitude that once or twice is enough prevail on here? Consider yourself the receiver... wouldn't you much more likely respond to someone who's message and profile you've seen come over several times? I know I would. I consider them more serious and it begins to seem like they are more interested in me and not just casting a wide net and seeing what they catch with it. So why give up if you've tried only 1 or 2 times?
What you're proposing works well when one is attempting to do business networking. It might even work well in attempting to establish purely platonic relational spheres. I don't think it works as well in an online environment geared towards dating or romantic relationships. There are ladies whose profiles I have viewed several times, and didn't write either because I only had a moment at that particular point in time (in which case I usually add them to my favorites list so I can come back at a later point when I have more time to write), or because I'm not yet fully convinced I want to write them. Sometimes I find their picture(s) really appealing, but I have to think long and hard about what they've written before I decide whether I want to initiate contact or not.
It also doesn't help that repeated viewings can come off as stalkerish; my female friends tell me, and I have little reason to disbelieve them, that if a guy is watching them out in public, and they notice him looking at them several times without coming over and introducing himself, they're creeped out. They feel more like they're a piece of meat being sized up than a potential person of interest to a complete stranger (and the general level of harmful psychosis in America seems more elevated than ever now that so many have the anonymity of the Internet to protect them).
SeaandSun11 said:
And why do we assume that a "relationship" could possibly exist with only 1 short message? I can't tell you the number of times I'm asked for my personal email address or a suggestion is made that we chat on IM when all I know is that they think we have some things in common and I've got some basic BIO! Totally defeats the purpose of this site in my opinion. What is so wrong with taking advantage of the security of this site and conversing here for awhile? It seems as good as my personal inbox and then your messages don't get mixed in with all the spam and potentially lost. Do we just play by such different rules that it is almost hopeless that we will ever connect? Or are we all just in such a hurry that we've decided the thoughtful, conservative methods (true "courting") just don't apply in today's world?
There's nothing wrong with taking a more traditional courting approach if both peoples' values skew in that direction. I just came out of a large church here in Seattle (well, not "just"; it was going on 2 years ago now) that highly pushed the whole "courtship" thing, in a method I'm inclined to think is ultimately going to turn around and bite them in the ass, as it wasn't tremendously well-informed in light of the diverse and very large congregation they have.
As for using this site as a method of longer-term communication prior to meeting, this is going to, again, depend on the people in question, as everyone's going to approach it in subtly different fashions (or sometimes not so subtly). In my experience of using online personals (which in an on and off fashion has persisted for some 12 years now), you can often form a method of connection online that isn't reflected in real life, because real life has so many factors involved that are completely removed in a text-only online environment. There have been more than one or two ladies in the aforementioned 12 years that I've gotten along fabulously with when online, but when we meet offline, it just didn't feel the same. We could both remember all the things that seemed so connective when we were using an IM client or an e-mail window, but it was as though those things just weren't there, or were radically changed in their presentation, when we weren't online. It made for either boring or, in a couple of unfortunate occurrences, actively uncomfortable dating experiences.
In one instance, there was a lady I met from this very site who, while a wonderful woman in most ways, just ultimately wasn't for me. We got along great through e-mail, and we moved things to a phone conversation. We were doing well enough by phone, but the voice connection provided additional layers of communication that e-mail didn't provide, and as we talked about things that would be important in founding a relationship, I found that there were some differences that were fundamental enough that I foresaw a lot more conflict than I want, particularly in the so-fragile and vulnerable early stages of forming a relationship.
Because of these difficulties, I favor meeting in person sooner rather than later. It isn't that I want to rush anything; it's that I want to know we'll actually enjoy being around each other instead of just enjoying e-mailing each other or using IM. Windows Live Messenger is great, but Windows Live Messenger rarely provides me with someone who I can look at and burst into laughter as we both simultaneously remember a hilarious incident we shared in the past.
Safety isn't even really an issue anymore. Coffee shops, particularly Starbucks, are ubiquitous, and at least here in Seattle, there are tons of non-threatening, fun things to do that still provide a lot of public presence to make someone feel safe. There are walks around Green Lake, hanging out at Seattle Center, going to Golden Gardens Park, checking out the Ballard Locks, or even wandering downtown to mallwalk through Pacific Place or going to have a bite at the Cheesecake Factory. Doing these things tells me if she's someone I'm really interested in, and if she is (and she shares the interest), we can either extend a one-hour meeting into a legitimate first date, or we can plan a legitimate first date for the near future. | |
|
|
Home
login 
