|
|
|
|
|
| SUGGESTION: Add email statistics to user profiles
Posted: 1/18/2006 1:02:21 PM | The redundancy and popularity of forum threads concerning unread/deleted and read/deleted emails -- in general, emails that receive no reply -- shows that this is a disturbing issue for many. Here's a suggestion that might help save time and aggravation for many people on both sides of that fence. From what I understand, E-bay has a similar system.
As it is, POF shows things such as whether a person has read a particular email, how many favorites lists they are on, etc. How about adding a stat regarding a person's general habits re answering emails?
It could show up, for instance, as "BusyLady answered .01% of her emails last month". This would solve problems for all parties involved.
People who don't like writing thoughtful letters only to have them completely ignored could stop wasting their time writing to people who are most likely to do just that.
The people who are serious about meeting someone this way would get more -- and better quality -- mail because the time that would have been wasted on people who regularly ignore letters would now be spent on those who are more likely to answer them. As it is now, many of us -- who have no way of knowing who is likely to dignify our efforts with a response -- have either given up sending letters at all or no longer bother to put a lot of thought into the ones we do write.
The ones who do not answer most letters would be significantly less burdened by all these unwanted emails they now receive. Of course, the rude clowns who write ignorant emails would probably keep sending them because surely most of those fools are just indulging their nastiness and don't really expect a reply. Nevertheless, many others -- who do send polite expressions of interest but can read the writing on the wall -- would stop plugging their inboxes. Of those potential writers, only those who consider themselves special enough to warrant a reply from these people would bother to write them. The email overload problem would be reduced by 50% or more -- just like that!
The only possible objections I can imagine to this system might come from people who rarely answer emails but are afraid that they might lose out on an email from Mr. or Mrs. Right if their infrequent response rate was made public. This problem is easily solved. They can take the time to write to Mr. or Mrs. Right themselves. Others might possibly object that revealing this statistic is somehow an invasion of their privacy. If so, it is no more of an invasion of privacy than the stats and information that are now being revealed here -- and they have the right to not post a profile here at all if they can't accept those.
Adoption of this additional feature to the POF email system would eliminate a lot of unwanted email for those who say they receive too much of it, encourage serious seekers to send more (and more thoughtful) emails to those who are legitimately interested in finding someone here, and save a lot of time and aggravation for all concerned. | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/18/2006 1:08:49 PM | Here, here, where do I sign up for this service. It makes total and complete sense.
They should also have forums for opposite sex haters, so they could vent their venom and not bother the rest of the people on innocent threads. | |
|
| |
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/18/2006 5:39:21 PM | LOL
an "I hate the world" thread
or "Nobody likes me..wwwaaaaaa" thread.
Funny :)
What a beautiful forum contribution -- and such an intelligent response to a post that seeks to reduce the need for such threads. Apparently you detest these so much that you can't resist the urge to whine about them in a hateful manner. Do you think that's funny at all -- or would "pathetic" perhaps be a better description? | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/18/2006 5:49:20 PM | Well, one thing I do know, is that you have no sense of humour.
Ok, wait
Before you start getting all pissed off and s.hit, i thought you wanted to have a forum where people go to complain.
I apologize.
No need to be rude to me, either....
Carry on. | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/18/2006 6:29:14 PM |
Well, one thing I do know, is that you have no sense of humour.
Ok, wait
Before you start getting all pissed off and s.hit, i thought you wanted to have a forum where people go to complain.
Melly, shouldn't you read the original post before you jump in with supposedly humorous insults that neither answer the question of the thread nor make any responsible contribution to it?
I apologize.
Apology accepted with thanks.
No need to be rude to me, either....
Please accept my apology in return for any perceived rudeness in my response.
Carry on.
OK, I will. Melly, what do you think of the suggestion made in the original post here? Do you think it would be a good idea for POF to adopt it? Why or why not? Thanks in advance for your participation and any helpful contributions that you can make. | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/18/2006 6:41:47 PM |
Melly, shouldn't you read the original post before you jump in with supposedly humorous insults that neither answer the question of the thread nor make any responsible contribution to it?
Look..mr...artandsoul :)
I read the first few lines.
Thought that is what the post was going tobe about, and wrote down my comment before i forgot it, as i laughed when i thought of it.
Im sorry if i offended you in anyway, I didnt mean to.
I did read the whole post, afterwards.
In regards to your question, Im not sure if it would be...in the best interest of everybody involved, to do such a thing.
It would, however weed out the "read/delete" people...
I dont have a very good comment to add, except for this.
If everybody has a number beside their name, saying "mellybabez replied to 90% of her emails this month"....
Wouldnt....everybody want a high number?
So, in turn, people would just send stupid replies, in order to increase their number, so they dont look bad? | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/18/2006 6:59:59 PM | Melly, no problem. All is forgiven on both sides, I hope.
I think that a lot of people WOULDN'T want a high number there. Many say that their inboxes are jammed as it is. It seems that most such people should appreciate anything that helped reduce the amount of email they receive. They'd still be free to send letters to those they were interested in and less burdened by unwanted email from those who aren't interesting to them. People who regularly ignore emails don't seem to consider it rude so I don't think they'd be afraid of looking bad.
Thanks to you for raising some good questions and also to Catchastar for her contribution here. | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/18/2006 7:04:59 PM | Okay, so say your suggestion is implemented. One day, BusyLady signs up at POF. She puts up a picture. In addition to being busy, she's also a good looking lady. We all know what that means - lots of emails from guys being... ummm... let's just say, less than polite.
Being new to the site, she's unfamiliar with the way other members like to engage in divination by interpreting things like how many favorite's lists she's on, or what unread/deleted means, or what percentage of her emails she answers. She foolishly makes the mistake not answering mails from men who have nothing better to say than "Nice rack", or "Wanna see my penis?"
Result - she gets a "low" rating. You point out a major flaw with the plan right here:
Of course, the rude clowns who write ignorant emails would probably keep sending them because surely most of those fools are just indulging their nastiness and don't really expect a reply.
Is it her fault that rude clowns keep emailing her? Should she have to answer and possibly encourage them just to keep her numbers high? Not to mention the potential for abuse if someone takes a dislike to you. All they have to do is keep emailing you, knowing you won't answer, and knowing you will get a lower rating because of it.
Say she decides to change her picture, or remove it completely, to discourage the less desirable element. Can she get her rating (a result of undesirable attention) wiped out and start over without deleting her profile? Or does she have to live with the low percentage for the rest of her profile days because she didn't understand the deeper meaning some people infer from all these silly numbers? (And as evidenced by the exchange between you and Melly - people are going to have different ideas of whether a high or low number is a good thing. So what's the point?) | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/18/2006 7:07:54 PM | Yes, yes it is. I would hate for you to be angry with me, as i have checked you out many times, and that would make me...sad.
Anyways, You have another good point there.
I get alot of emails, even thoe im just here for "friends".
less burdened by unwanted email from those who aren't interesting to them
This would be avoided, by having stricter preference settings, we alll know what im talking about :)
Alot of people ignore emails, because they think this is all a game.
I admit, i dont get back to some emails the same day. Maybe not until a day or two afterwards, but i always reply.
Even with my friends on here, sometimes im just on to read the mails, then come back later to respond.
When some men see "read" and then get no reply, then send an angry email, not allowing the girl to have any time..to either respond, or think of a nice decent reply..
Then again, like i said, its all a game to some people... | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/18/2006 8:52:57 PM | people, people, people ! much ado about little here, lets not lose site of the fact that it's a free site here, and a lot of analysis paralysis about sending out an initial paragraph at best, shouldn't be such a time consuming chore.
I may see the validity, perhaps on a pay site where one might want to save a couple of euros or two, but really is it such a death blow when they don't reply or send back a howdy doody - no thanks? on POF's nickle? You know the mantra - "Next" | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/19/2006 12:49:17 AM | people, people, people ! much ado about little here, lets not lose site of the fact that it's a free site here, and a lot of analysis paralysis about sending out an initial paragraph at best, shouldn't be such a time consuming chore.
I may see the validity, perhaps on a pay site where one might want to save a couple of euros or two, but really is it such a death blow when they don't reply or send back a howdy doody - no thanks? on POF's nickle? You know the mantra - "Next"
I don't really see what the fact that it's not a pay site has to do with anything. Don't you want this site to be as effective as possible in helping to get people together? Judging by the "ads" about the effectiveness of POF that one sees here, one would assume that is the case.
Here's what's happening the way things are with the status quo. More and more of us who do send decent emails are not even bothering to send them at all. Why? Because in all too many cases we don't even get the courtesy of a reply. The longer we are here, the less emails we send out and the less time we spend on each one. The less emails that we send out and the less time we take on each one, the less chance there is that good connections will happen. Hence, the overall effectiveness of POF as a dating site is adversely affected. Personally I would have abandoned this site long ago -- as I have all of the pay sites which are worse -- were it not for the forums which I do enjoy. Would it be costly to implement the suggestion made?
You know the mantra - "Next"
Did anyone ever suggest that not receiving an answer is a "death blow"?
"Analysis paralysis"?
"People, people, people! much ado about little here!"?
"You know the mantra - 'Next'"?
What kind of answers are these? Is this how you treat everyone who makes a suggestion around here -- with a flippant and insulting dismissal? Is this POF policy? This is the second time I've respectfully made a suggestion here and the second time I've received this kind of treatment from a "moderator". Why do you have site suggestion threads if you intend to treat people who make suggestions this way? Why should we even bother? | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/19/2006 2:04:59 AM | One day, BusyLady signs up at POF. She puts up a picture. In addition to being busy, she's also a good looking lady. We all know what that means - lots of emails from guys being... ummm... let's just say, less than polite.
Being new to the site, she's unfamiliar with the way other members like to engage in divination by interpreting things like how many favorite's lists she's on, or what unread/deleted means, or what percentage of her emails she answers. She foolishly makes the mistake not answering mails from men who have nothing better to say than "Nice rack", or "Wanna see my penis?"
Result - she gets a "low" rating.
Trilby, thanks for taking the time to point out possible flaws in the proposed system. That's how ideas and systems get perfected. I don't think those possible flaws will really be a problem though and here's why:
Suppose that 50% of her email is from rude jerks. She ignores those. Let's say 30% is from guys who are polite but not of interest to her. If she answers those briefly anyway and blocks them after replying, she's still at a 50% response frequency rate. Not bad at all -- certainly not bad enough to discourage decent guys from writing her if they have any confidence in themselves at all. The guys will do the math themselves and realize that, as beautiful as she is, she's probably getting lots of mail from jerks so 50% is not a bad response rate. If she decides not to answer the polite but uninteresting guys her response rate would still be at 20%. Now, you may ask, what if only ten percent of the guys are of interest to her? Well, I suppose if she cares about her response frequency rate she can take a few minutes to answer a few of them at least. Or she can take her chances that some decent guys will still risk it and write to her. Or she can write to them herself -- now she has a chance to do the picking and choosing herself while being less burdened with email from unattractive suitors -- unless she's even too busy to bother scanning profiles herself.
If a person ignores more than 80 - 90% of her emails, don't you think prospective writers have a right to be forewarned before they waste their time writing to them? I don't see why anyone would care if people knew the frequency of emails that they respond to. Most of them don't seem to consider it rude not to answer anyway -- so what do they have to hide? And if their inboxes are so full that they have no time to answer even 10 - 20% of them, wouldn't they welcome any improvement in the system that reduced the flow?
Is it her fault that rude clowns keep emailing her? Should she have to answer and possibly encourage them just to keep her numbers high? Not to mention the potential for abuse if someone takes a dislike to you. All they have to do is keep emailing you, knowing you won't answer, and knowing you will get a lower rating because of it.
First, having a lower rating is not necessarily a bad thing as pointed out above. Having it moderately low would discourage not only persons who don't think they have much of a chance with her anyway but also -- most likely -- even a number of the absolute jerks would be discouraged if her response rate was very low because they know that their chances of getting the attention that they crave are so limited. An attractive woman doesn't need to keep that number high. She will get plenty of emails no matter what, it seems.
Second, re "potential for abuse": if the jerk senders are immediately blocked they could have no effect on her rating after a single email. If the lady in question is really worried about her "stats" in this area -- which she needn't be ... unless they are ridiculously low, perhaps -- she could always answer a few, tell them to take a hike and block them right after sending it.
Or does she have to live with the low percentage for the rest of her profile days because she didn't understand the deeper meaning some people infer from all these silly numbers?
The stats could be freshly updated for a new period weekly, monthly or even daily (as the favorites lists are) -- whatever seems most appropriate. If you check the original post, I did suggest that it could say "Busylady answered .01% of her emails last month." Whether some infer deep meanings "from all these silly numbers" or not, nevertheless some do find them of value. Apparently POF thinks that favorites lists, info about whether your emails have been read/deleted, etc, are -- potentially at least -- of some value or they wouldn't include any such information here.
(And as evidenced by the exchange between you and Melly - people are going to have different ideas of whether a high or low number is a good thing. So what's the point?)
Melly and I have made our peace after some initial difficulties. People are always going to have differing ideas about the value of a particular feature. No doubt many wish that there were no such things as favorites lists or that any information at all concerning their email answering habits was made available. That doesn't mean that there is no point to having any of these things. The points would be:
(a) to reduce unwanted email for busy people
(b) to help all letter writers to waste less time writing to those who are too busy to answer them and spend more time writing to people who are likely to answer them
(c) to save time and aggravation for all these parties
(d) to make this site more pleasant and less frustrating for all concerned
(e) to make this site more effective as a means for people to make romantic connections. | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/19/2006 3:46:53 PM |
If a person ignores more than 80 - 90% of her emails, don't you think prospective writers have a right to be forewarned before they waste their time writing to them?
A simple number doesn't give you any indication of why they've received that rating. Just about anything can be "proved" with statistics. If you really want to know what's going on, you have to know more about what's behind those statistics. Finding out someone only answers 10% of their mail won't tell you if it's because 90% is from rude jerks, or if they're not answering their mail because they've recently spent all their time at the bedside of their sick mother, or if they're just here playing games.
If 90% of their mail is coming from jerks, then someone who sends a thoughtful email may have a pretty good chance of getting a response, even though the response rating is only 10%. But if a potential thoughtful sender only looks at the 10% figure, not knowing the reason for it, he might be less likely to send an email to someone that is actually more likely to respond.
I don't see why anyone would care if people knew the frequency of emails that they respond to.
I don't see why anyone would care either, but I'm pretty sure a lot of people would. Just because you or I wouldn't mind having that number displayed on our profiles, it doesn't automatically follow that everyone would think it's a harmless extra. I'd anticipate it would cause just as much speculation and complaining as the favorites lists or the unread/deleted status do.
But, just as with the favorites list and the unread/deleted status, I also don't see why anyone would put any stock in a reply response statistic without knowing the facts behind it. As Melly already pointed out, it would be easy to send a quick reply to everyone just to keep your response rate high. If an individual is worried about their rating (whether it's rational for them to be or not), all they have to do is send everyone a happy face then block them. Response rate - 100%. Chance of getting a reply that actually says something - close to zero. The number rating has given you no useful information.
And I could be wrong about this, but I believe Admin may use the information about who's getting blocked to sniff out potential troublemakers. Having people block others just to keep their ratings high may mess with some stuff going on behind the scenes.
even a number of the absolute jerks would be discouraged if her response rate was very low because they know that their chances of getting the attention that they crave are so limited.
So instead of bothering her they will move on to someone with a high number. By giving people ratings, you give the attention seekers a way to home in on the people most likely to give them attention. I'd guess the people who think it's rude not to answer every mail would get frustrated with that situation pretty quickly. In fact, I could see people belonging to that group being among the first to start complaining about the response ratings being displayed on their profiles.
The points would be:
(a) to reduce unwanted email for busy people
Personally, I don't think it would reduce unwanted mail. I think it would just redistribute it amongst people who are more likely to reply, and potentially transform them into people who are too busy to reply.
(b) to help all letter writers to waste less time writing to those who are too busy to answer them and spend more time writing to people who are likely to answer them
As detailed above, I don't think ratings would be of any use in determining who's more likely to answer. A simple number doesn't give you enough information.
(c) to save time and aggravation for all these parties
(d) to make this site more pleasant and less frustrating for all concerned
From what I've observed around here, aggravation and frustration regarding this topic seem to be mostly self-inflicted. Many people manage to send mail, get no response, and move on without getting aggravated or frustrated.
(e) to make this site more effective as a means for people to make romantic connections
Well, if I answer this one we'll veer off into a completely different topic, so I'm leaving it alone.  | |
|
late™
|
Joined: 1/9/2005
Msg: 15 | |
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/19/2006 4:06:56 PM |
From what I've observed around here, aggravation and frustration regarding this topic seem to be mostly self-inflicted. Many people manage to send mail, get no response, and move on without getting aggravated or frustrated.
Yup,
Besides; other profile stats have been tried and discarded as a "simple number" doesn't necessarily deliver the whole picture.
If someone doesn't choose to answer anybody for whatever reason, it's their business. | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/19/2006 4:40:40 PM | I don't really see what the fact that it's not a pay site has to do with anything. Don't you want this site to be as effective as possible in helping to get people together? Judging by the "ads" about the effectiveness of POF that one sees here, one would assume that is the
case.
Judging by reviews of other dating sites, the majority, if with not all, are bottom line complaints in the waste of money spent on such occurrences of the un-replied email syndrome.
Here's what's happening the way things are with the status quo. More and more of us who do send decent emails are not even bothering to send them at all. Why? Because in all too many cases we don't even get the courtesy of a reply. The longer we are here, the less emails we send out and the less time we spend on each one. The less emails that we send out and the less time we take on each one, the less chance there is that good connections will happen. Hence, the overall effectiveness of POF as a dating site is adversely affected. Personally I would have abandoned this site long ago -- as I have all of the pay sites which are worse -- were it not for the forums which I do enjoy. Would it be costly to implement the suggestion made?
As an aside, you wouldn't have left those other pay sites you alluded to because of the waste of money now, would you have? - an honest question but answer not required.
The ultimate effectiveness of any site lies in its membership, being able to effectively search for that suitable match, the compatibility between you and the recipient, and then based on the effectiveness of your email and your profile and whether the recipient thinks your profile is worthy of their time. With all due respect, they will more than likely scan your profile first, so whether or not you write prose worthy of Shakespeare, is not going to amount to a hill of beans if the raw criteria they seek isn't in your profile - your email can still suffer the read/deleted death, regardless of their answer rate. Consider spotting what you deem to be the perfect match, but you see a 5% reply rate, surely you're not going to bypass it are you. There's a multitude of reasons why the rate can be skewed, most of which have been mentioned.
-There are too many variables that go into compiling such statistics
-maybe they get too many emails to answer - hence they will, scan profile and decide whether to delete or reply
-maybe there are more friends emailing them a majority of the times
-maybe they've answered them all with no thanks, does that make it any better?
-maybe it's a fake profile, troll, etc...
-at what point do you deem the percentage to be a true reflection of their suitability to email?
Now, on to the good stuff .....
Did anyone ever suggest that not receiving an answer is a "death blow"?
Judging by the sheer volume of thought was put into the OP, here and on the other forums on the subject by countless other posters, and their reactions - yes, one could make that inference.
"Analysis paralysis"?
Again, if one is going to sit there and agonize whether or not to email someone, and then be suddenly enlightened based on some statistical percentage of emails replied to, given the inherent flaws in its interpretation - again, yes I think we would be knee deep in either paralysis or a sheer fear of rejection.
What kind of answers are these? Is this how you treat everyone who makes a suggestion around here -- with a flippant and insulting dismissal? Is this POF policy? This is the second time I've respectfully made a suggestion here and the second time I've received this kind of treatment from a "moderator". Why do you have site suggestion threads if you intend to treat people who make suggestions this way? Why should we even bother?
If you are suggesting that this is twice in this thread that you've been met with flippant replies from Mods, then you would be wrong, as I was the only Mod to have replied at that point and not in the capacity of a Mod either may I add.
Insulting? surely you jest, sarcastic perhaps but insulting would be highly suspect. However, being a Mod doesn't preclude me from participating as a regular member, hence do not take my replies to any "suggestions" as an official POF reply or official policy (EDIT: Unless it is a definitive and conclusive position based on Admin's wishes and/or stated policy in which it will be rather apparent) . Suggestions are acted upon by Admin only and if I chose to respond to a suggestion and perhaps do not find it particularly effective, doesn't make it any more or less viable a suggestion. It's a suggestion none the less and always noted. My reply was based on my ongoing observations and comments in the continuing long drawn out, ad nauseum threads over the last year, of how to effectively combat the read/deleted syndrome, also known as the "no one takes the time to reply or read my emails" variant.
My thoughts within current constraints of any site, however they are perceived, will still be to concentrate on one's profile, continue with writing proper emails, and email who would appear to be a suitable match - and lastly, for a lack of a more sensitive phrase, grow a thick skin, take a couple of optimism pills and don't make this your sole venue, these tips will go farther in the long run, than a dubious statistic that leaves far too much to interpretation and knee jerk conclusions.
Just bare in mind that how one reacts is solely within one's control, not the site's ineffectiveness. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, even in the light of a 1% reply rate. If nothing becomes of it, the mantra will still hold - "Next!". | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/19/2006 5:15:42 PM | Just out of PURE curiosity I'm wondering if there are ANY sites that offer this? As late has said, numbers don't tell the complete picture. Good example is the favorites lists. Been a number of threads from people who don't email people with a high number on their favorites list. Is that an accurate predictor of their chances of getting a response? Read the threads, you'll see it is not. It may sound like a good idea in theory, but there are FAR too many variables involved. Most of all, it's based on human behavior which is nearly impossible to quantify numerically. I think trapped has given you an insightful and very thorough reply. Plainly, there is NO way to know who will answer and who won't. Just like there is no guarantee that wearing the right clothes, going to the right club on the right night will assure you that you'll get to talk to a woman or get a phone number.
I CAN give you something that will work, it just involves patience. All of my friends who've "hooked up" here, first off were NOT looking, and certainly NOT into the emailing thing exclusively but spent most of their time in the forums. They were enjoying the site, engaging in conversation and meeting new friends. Most of all their attitude and outlook were positive and upbeat! I met many amazing friends here. We email each other all the time. Chances are if you engage someone in the forums and write them you're VERY likely to get a response. Plus, you'll know much better how they think and react to different topics much better than just scanning a profile. People who are happy and having fun are MUCH more attractive than those that are frustrated. If you're getting uptight about it all, then maybe some time spent doing something else might give you a new perspective. I've taken "time away" and came back refreshed and ready to just enjoy myself again.
Just suggestions, do what you will. | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/19/2006 5:48:59 PM | Thanks, Trilby, for the thoughtful answers.
I agree that there is potential for misreading of statistics, etc, in the feature I proposed and that all statistics are subject to such misreading. That could be mitigated somewhat by a disclaimer similar to the one at the top of the inboxes now, something to the effect of: "Hey, don't automatically assume that a low response rate means this person is rude. Some members (.01%) receive an exceptionally high volume of mail from ignorant jerks that they can't be expected to respond to. Try sending them a polite letter." OK, I jest somewhat.
Some no doubt feel that we shouldn't get any information regarding what people do with our emails, ie, whether they have been read, deleted or whatever. I suppose that's very debatable -- but personally I am glad that POF has such a feature and it is definitely an improvement upon what is offered at pay sites where your letters just disappear completely into the ether with the added insult of paying for that privilege. I should add that, in my opinion, POF is certainly superior to all of these sites -- and the fact that it is a free site is only ONE of those superior qualities. I believe that the founder of the site -- and all who participate in running it -- must take some justifiable pride in its overall effectiveness and quality. My suggestions here are meant to help -- not just to complain.
Agreed also that the jerks might just transfer their ignorant attentions to those who do answer most of their mail. In turn, those people would see their rating drop when they started ignoring those letters. As acknowledged, a very high response rating is not necessarily a badge of honor even though some might irrationally perceive it as such. No doubt many irrational perceptions about favorites lists are happening yet POF still has them and many do find them of value.
Your example of a person who receives 90% of her email from ignorant jerks seems a little farfetched to me so I'm not sure it's really a valid objection. Do you think that's a very likely scenario?
From what I've observed around here, aggravation and frustration regarding this topic seem to be mostly self-inflicted. Many people manage to send mail, get no response, and move on without getting aggravated or frustrated.
I suppose that one could consider such aggravation "self inflicted". Still, haven't you ever experienced frustration about people who don't bother to answer phone calls or letters? Sure, such people often don't deserve to get them so you move on and no longer bother to call them. I organize music shows that involve many details and require phone calls, messages, etc, to a lot of people. When I first started doing it, I noticed that some of them seemed to be too busy to get back to me with necessary information and I had to make repeated phone calls to get an answer. Then they said, "Oh, sorry, I was really busy." (Ironically, often these are the same people who would complain most loudly if some aspect of the show was less than well organized -- just as the people who never answer their letters are often the first to say "well, you should take some time to write me a creative letter!") Eventually, I learned that to rid myself of this frustration, I had to tell these people, "Look, I'm not calling to gab about the weather. If you're too busy to get back to me in a reasonable time, I'm too busy to chase you around. Find yourself another show to be in."
Translating all that to the online dating scene, of course we do "move on". Unfortunately, what a lot of us do is to move on -- not to other persons of interest -- but right out of the email game completely. Arri made the point in another thread that guys who aren't idiots no longer bother to send emails and instead wait for women to send them to us. Given that many women still seem to think the man should make the first move, this is not always the ideal situation. If we had some inkling that our efforts were likely to be dignified with an answer -- favorable or not -- we might get back in the game and this would increase the overall effectiveness of the site as a means of making romantic connections. Or do you think that emailing interesting people that you haven't connected with in forums is mostly a lost cause anyway?
In any case, I agree that there are potential bugs and flaws in the proposed feature -- as there in any system -- but I still don't feel that these are necessarily sufficient reason to reject the idea. I wonder if a poll could be taken to see how many members would appreciate such a feature? If, for instance, a large number of members approved of it, would POF consider implementing it -- this question to POF, obviously.
I do appreciate that you have taken the time to state your objections in a thoughtful way.
Also, I would like to apologize to the moderators if my complaint about the handling of my suggestion here came across as rude. I know that you guys have a tough job. I don't know whether Trapped was responding as a POF moderator or merely as an individual POF member. I've just found that when I make a suggestion here it seems to basically get dismissed rather flippantly. When people make suggestions to us re the affairs of our non profit music association, we try to show a little respect when we reply. We may think their ideas are stupid in some cases but we don't show that when we respond. The rather laconic and borderline sarcastic dismissals of the suggestions that I have made here don't encourage a person to make any more of them. Unless POF has instituted these suggestion threads only to give the appearance of being receptive to member input -- which I doubt -- this doesn't seem like a desirable state of affairs. | |
|
late™
|
Joined: 1/9/2005
Msg: 19 | |
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/19/2006 6:04:34 PM | As has been said, other mail stats have been a part of profiles before, some people felt it was an imposition on their privacy = the stats were removed.
IMO, How, when, and if people reply to POF mail is up to the individual, as with the "other" stats that were previously inclusive of member's profiles, this is another one that not only doesn't tell the "whole story" in a number, it's probably one that really isn't anybody's business.
I base this opinion on similar "things" that have been tried on POF, ...and abandoned. | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/19/2006 7:31:26 PM |
Your example of a person who receives 90% of her email from ignorant jerks seems a little farfetched to me so I'm not sure it's really a valid objection. Do you think that's a very likely scenario?
I just picked a number to make a point. Having never had a picture on my profile, I have no idea how much dumb mail a woman with an attractive picture might get. Maybe one of the Ladies of Cleavage could give us a better idea of what would be a realistic number.
Still, haven't you ever experienced frustration about people who don't bother to answer phone calls or letters?
I don't think that's a good analogy. If you're calling a friend or someone you have business with, you have a right to expect a reply. What we're doing here is more like a salesman making a cold call. A salesman who expects some kind of favourable response from every call (even if it's just a polite "no, thanks" rather than having the phone slammed down on him) is going to get disappointed, and probably disheartened, very quickly, and likely won't last long as a salesman. You have to have a way of dealing with that kind of rejection, and not everyone knows how. For the ones that don't know how, perhaps this isn't the best way to meet people.
If we had some inkling that our efforts were likely to be dignified with an answer -- favorable or not -- we might get back in the game and this would increase the overall effectiveness of the site as a means of making romantic connections. Or do you think that emailing interesting people that you haven't connected with in forums is mostly a lost cause anyway?
It's only my opinion, but I think online dating sites are an extremely ineffective way of finding romance if you're focusing your search on finding a romantic partner and nothing else. Actually, I think any method of finding romance, when you focus on that objective and nothing else, is pretty much doomed. That kind of searching seems to turn people a little bitter, and they run the risk of becoming, or at least appearing, desperate and negative, which only makes it harder for them to find what they're looking for.
But if you forget about the romance and just try to have fun, dating sites can be a good way of finding people who are the same wavelength, people you can be friends with, or even people who make great forum sparring partners.
And sometimes those friends or sparring partners can turn into more when you least expect it, just as Bucsgirl pointed out above. | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/21/2006 12:18:25 AM |
Plainly, there is NO way to know who will answer and who won't. Just like there is no guarantee that wearing the right clothes, going to the right club on the right night will assure you that you'll get to talk to a woman or get a phone number.
I look at the problem a little bit like buying stocks-- while it's true that " past performance isn't an indicator of future results", as one of Murphy's Law tells us "...but that's the way the smart money bets." I guess I'd like to have any and all information I can get before making a decision to write someone.
Premise: People like getting interesting, personalized letters, and the people writing them expend considerable time and effort in creating them. It's quite understandable that they'd feel a little gypped if they made a good faith effort to ascertain those same letters would only be going to people who were likely to find receiving them enjoyable enough to respond in kind, only to find out the hard way that the person to whom they were writing had a habit of only responding to letters coming from millionaire celebrities. (Ok, I'm being just a teeny facetious, but you get the idea :)
Since people can play all kinds of games with profiles, it helps to have at least some additional information that they have no control over.
Premise: Ebay has this very system in place, and while it does get circumvented, its overall predictability is good enough for most people.
No system is perfect, but _some_ kind of systematic approach is better than anarchy. That Ebay's system has stood the test of time highly recommends its efficacy. Of course, the downside to this is that it may not prove technically feasible for POF-- but that's one of the things this thread seeks to explore, no?
Premise: A person not looking for dates, but rather 'Talk/Email' friends would find this system a big help.
I'm one of those persons, so I own up to any selfish motives on my part for suggesting this. I write very few letters and scrupuolouly avoid sending letters to people with other stated goals in their profiles. Since I'm not asking anyone for a date, much less *any* form of committment, I think that at least somewhat lowers the bar on 'chemistry' since physical intimacy isn't part of the equation.
I'm not sure how many respondents to this thread know much about the golden era of Usenet. It was a free for all, but at least one could check a person's posting history via services like Deja News. One could quickly find enough infomation to spot 90% of the trollers and flamers, and to avoid those people. Plus, most Unix software to read Usenet had very good 'killfile' capability to filter them out. Those factors helped a great deal in making the experience a bit more managealbe and enjoyable.
Just brainstorming-- and as always, your mileage may vary,
-Kerry O. | |
|
PA!GE®
|
Joined: 11/9/2005
Msg: 22 | |
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/21/2006 12:52:25 AM |
I am 100% against this
I get too many messages from guys who just message me again and again despite me saying no thanks or not answering them fast enough
It would be like those ppl who judge me because so many have added me to THEIR favs
I've only added ONE person to my favs that is not a mod or a regular forum user that we talk while posting | |
|
late™
|
Joined: 1/9/2005
Msg: 23 | |
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/21/2006 1:04:58 AM | I'm not sure how many respondents to this thread know much about the golden era of Usenet. It was a free for all, but at least one could check a person's posting history via services like Deja News. One could quickly find enough infomation to spot 90% of the trollers and flamers, and to avoid those people.
Deja News was swallowed up by Google, still works for Usenet too.....
(lacking moderation, usenet has turned into a cesspool of spammers, scammers, trolls, and ass-clowns)
POF has meta tags, it can also be searched via Google.
But never did it allow you to access anybody's "replied to" email %, nor can you access email reply % on eBay... Only issues involving "business" conducted AFTER completed auctions (where there IS risk involved). Hmmmm... what would this really be analogous to, on POF????
 Those who aren't getting replies may be better served by considering Ben Franklin's definition of insanity, and change their approach if it isn't yielding the results they want.
How many don't have a forum pic?
How many send out "form" letters without really reading the profile of the person they are contacting?
How many lack an interestingly presented profile?
How many are married/prefer not to say, seeking intimate encounters?
(surprising how common this one is with the "no replies" complainers)
How many send messages like: "U R kewt, wat R U whereing"
There are two choices currently,
- adapt to others wants and needs
- expect them to adapt to yours.
Which do you think would work better on a dating site?
I am 100% against this
I get too many messages from guys who just message me again and again despite me saying no thanks or not answering them fast enough
It would be like those ppl who judge me because so many have added me to THEIR favs
Yup. | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/21/2006 1:28:51 AM | ... at least one could check a person's posting history via services like Deja News. One could quickly find enough infomation to spot 90% of the trollers and flamers, and to avoid those people.
Configure your Newsreader to: No X-Archive - When this option is enabled, posts will not be stored in archive sites.
No need to look up anything, a handful of recent posts would tell the Story. | |
|
| email suggestion to save time and aggravation for all parties
Posted: 1/21/2006 2:12:42 AM | | By adding stats on mailings, you end up polarizing the membership. People want someone or something to blame for their lack of success, when people are in doubt they will keep trying. When someone gets no responses and see a low reply rating they will assume that no one on this site answers email and they will leave. Ie by just seeing this number it pisses off people and causes them to leave. Also the message history shows if someone has read your message etc. Many women on the site will check out your profile before they read your letter, if your profile "sucks", has no picture etc they will NOT open your letter. They do this because many people email them demanding to know why they didn't get a response, and only a read deleted. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
