Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Dating Experiences  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 79
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???Page 3 of 21    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21)
"As an example you can't tell me that a woman who receives 100 emails a month doesn't have more opportunity to date/find someone than a woman who gets only 10 emails a month. Makes no sense."

I'd even go a step beyond sound statistics (which would declare 100 random emails = much greater probability of success than 10 random emails, but obviously POF is not completely random) and say that any woman who is getting 100 first contact emails a month but can't find a single man to meet among them probably has those "profile issues" women are always telling men they have when they don't get any emails or responses -- you've written something or posted a picture that's turning off the "right men" (but not turning off the "wrong men"). Because it's rather illogical that so many women are finding some gems among the tons of earth in this kimberlite pipe (see the testimonials page; see the many threads in which women say they've met some "great guys" from here whether they started a relationship or not), yet some equally attractive women can't find any or hardly any. So either there are profile issues (despite the fact that most men supposedly don't even read the profiles, but the ones you're looking for probably do!), or there are personality issues that lead to over-selectiveness. Or, as I said in my previous post, it could be "location, location, location" -- I mean, any woman complaining there are no good men emailing them in my 4 million person area are almost certainly exaggerating, but for some isolated town in Wyoming or Canada, it's quite credible.

Or, it could be ANOTHER personality issue: women willing to email men first are far more likely to (A) get a date (B) get the date with the kind of men they want. You sit back and wait for the right man to email you, then you might be waiting until the cows come home, but that's what most women do on this site anyway. Just as it generally doesn't pay to be a male wallflower in internet dating, nor does it pay to be a female wallflower -- I mean, *I* email the vast majority of women I come across in my age bracket that don't disqualify me in their profiles, and yet I still miss thousands of perfectly good women. For example, I almost never search for a woman more than an inch or two taller than me because the statistics of the matter are highly against a taller woman dating me, but they aren't all COMPLETELY against it, as most of the women I have dated (all through means other than POF) have been taller than me, and I'm obviously not against it either. But I barely have enough time to email the hundreds of women who are about my height or shorter, so I have no choice but to sacrifice some possibly great, open-minded women who are taller than me, just for time efficiency's sake. But if a 6 foot tall woman doesn't care about the height factor (and I have known a couple like that) and thinks we'd be a great match, then it's up to her to email me, or else we will never even communicate; heck, I won't even know she exists.

I'm sure other guys have similar problems with other categories in major markets, too -- in a market this size or larger, there are 10,000 to 25,000 active female profiles each day -- with POF's simplified advanced search function, at best you can probably narrow that down to a few hundred to look at, and then you're probably excluding a bunch of women you'd still date but had to leave out of your searches just because of time constraints. The only way that issue can be alleviated (other than site changes) is for women to take more initiative in first contacts, because they probably come across many men in their own searches who would never see them in their searches, nearly doubling the initial communication possibilities. But timidness prevents anything from coming of that.

THIS IS TRUE IN GENERAL. Most women who post in the forums are obviously more assertive than the typical female POF user, by definition, and probably do email men, maybe even often. As has been said many times before, forum users aren't very representative of the general population.

On another topic: I'm most peculiar in that internet dating has been far more successful for me quantity-wise than in real life, as I've had 30+ different first dates/"meetings" through online means vs. only 4 (or maybe 5, or 6 depending on your definition of "date") in real life. Because I'm a writer, it's easier for me to "wow" women with the written word than the spoken word. Yet, ironically, I agree with all you guys that as far as Plenty of Fish is concerned, it's probably MUCH easier for me to convince women to go out with me in real life -- because all online dating is not the same, and POF is pretty nasty in comparison to other sites for bottom 1%-ers (as someone else pointed out in this thread). In fact, I think I've met 7 or 8 women through online means since I joined POF over 3 years ago, and as I pointed out in my first post here, none as a direct result of POF.

abelian/divine: Those are darn interesting posts.
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 80
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/10/2010 12:44:44 PM

Anyways as far as this subject goes, instead of the number of emails, try going by the amount of time.

Well, it's kind of like this, IMO: The stock market. If you find that chimpanzees are trading better on the market (by doing random selections) than you are with your thought put into it -- what you think women are more apt to respond to is false. Heck, at best, you should do a little better than the chimps (but still have room to be frustrated).

I think when it comes down to it, some people are too sensitive about the notion of someone not being their type, or also (gasp) out of their league. It hurts their ego... but coming to comfortable grips with that, one can at least spend their time first and foremost on people that are within their league more or less, and generally their type more or less. THEN, with the time remaining, extend it out with gals who are a bit out of their league or maybe not quite their type.

If a guy is emailing a gal who is within his league more or less, and seemingly his type more or less, it's still an uphill battle, sure. But I would not say 100 different women would bring 1 first date -- it'd be more than that IF he had his opening message on par, and knew how to correspond ideally after the fact. If he's a 5/10 in looks, and doesn't like going out much, him hitting up only the 100 of the hottest girls within a 100 mile radius over the span of 6 months won't get him much.
 DivineBovine
Joined: 5/13/2005
Msg: 81
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/10/2010 5:57:18 PM

Also, your last statement i highly doubt is accurate.


it is not MY statement.

these are actual statistics posted online by another major online dating site. this isn't me spouting off - it's what the data shows on that site.
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 82
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/10/2010 7:03:38 PM
To the line that was doubted...

actually... the men in the middle of the attractiveness scale get more initial contacts from women than those at the higher end of the scale. again, they went by photo ratings on the site to judge "attractiveness".

I don't find that too hard to believe in terms of the women doing -initiating- contact. However, consider a few things that can't be ignored:
- How good looking were the women? Good looking women get more attention than the "so-so", hence, less of a need to initiate contact.
- Women tend to initiate a lot less than guys. They're statistically more emotionally shy about it.
- People who are more emotionally shy about approaching (guy or girl) are more shy to aim for someone better looking than them, and more likely to aim for someone "cute but not hot", due to more sensitivity of rejection

All in all, in terms of guys' chances -- you have to weed out the ones who are notably less attractive than him (from a populous standpoint). Factor in that much fewer women any way write, it doesn't say much about the successes of a guy spawned by within-same-league women initiating emails.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 83
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/10/2010 10:41:15 PM

What's the point of dating someone you're not very attracted to?

That's true. On the other hand, I had a girlfriend who was in a Playboy pictorial and another who was much more attractive than her and after a few months, I didn't find them any more physically appealing than other girlfriends to whom I found less attractive, initially. You need to be physically attracted to someone, but if you're lower limit is say an 8, then at some point the difference between an 8 and a 10 will wear off. As the saying goes, no matter how good looking a person is, someone somewhere is sick of his/her sh!t.

"So.. like.. how come you never compliment me about my looks like other men in relationships do?"

That's no worse than having someone ask why you never compliment her on her intelligence and I've had more women want to be complimented on their intelligence than on their looks.

If you want to talk about leagues, you have to include a league for intelligence and other attributes, too. Then, you'll have average looking smart people with crappy personalities, and all sorts of combinations. It's not a matter of leagues but picking the tradeoffs that you find suitable.
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 85
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/11/2010 6:44:07 AM

The "getting lots of messages increases the probability of finding a date/someone" only seems logical.
However, it is not.
There isn't logic to it, because it is premised on the idea that the messages are dependent events, when they obviously are independent events.
Bob's message to Mary is independent of John's message to Mary, which is in turn independent of Carl's, and so on.
From the statistical perspective, the likelihood that Mary reads/deletes OR keeps Bob's message is independent of the number of messages received variable. Ditto for John's and Carl's.
Given the fact that they are independent, the number of them makes no difference to the outcome: 5 out of 5 could be great messages, 100 out of 100 could be "no way that guy" messages, 1 out of 1 could be the love of her life.
Statistically speaking, lots of messages vs. very few messages makes no difference to the outcome of what Mary does with Bob's message, or any other guy's message.

Thanks Jinx. Exactly.

If you're looking to hit a tennis ball, and you get 2 mixed in with 3 golf balls, you can work with that. If you get 100 (or 1000, what's the difference?) golf balls thrown at you, you just ain't playing tennis.

Doesn't matter how many messages you're getting if they're all let's just say for the same of diplomacy, "not good matches". You're still at square one.
 Paddy_o_Lantern
Joined: 12/9/2009
Msg: 86
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/11/2010 7:06:18 AM
^^^^^^I would agree with the dry statistical approach if we were machines dealing things in an orderly and manageable manner but we are not and a person takes a different view of messages when they have to deal with 100 per day vs one per day. Who knows if you are on the high end of the volume scale you may just be too tired and impatient to spot that special one.
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 88
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/11/2010 8:06:28 AM
Some things mentioned in this thread are the reasons why it was a bad idea for Markus to replace the "received no first contacts emails in the past 24 hours" search with "one log-in per day" search. The two things have nothing to do with each other. A very busy attractive woman probably only has time to log-in once a day, if that, yet I guarantee you that she accumulated quite a few first contact emails between log-ins. "no first contact emails" search helped alleviate the problem of the same top 5, 10, whatever % getting the vast majority of emails. You could usually find a few people in that search you found attractive and were surprised to discover they weren't getting any first contact emails for whatever reason. Now that opportunity is gone.

You don't have a link to that study, do you, Mr. Fication? That would explain a lot about this place.

I don't think receiving a bunch of emails necessarily increases the possibility that you will find "the one" (because there is supposedly only ONE the ONE, if you believe in that kind of stuff, and finding that person is like looking for a needle in a haystack for ANYONE), but the only way ON AVERAGE it doesn't increase the likelihood of finding a date/meeting vs. someone who is receiving far less messages is if there is something wrong with on the person's end who is receiving the messages (see my previous post). Obviously POF is not a random game of chance, so you can't fully apply the rules of chance here. But let's say you are willing to date the top 1% of men (according to your own rules), and let's say 100 completely random men send you emails one day -- at least 1 of them should be someone you would date. But let's say you have another woman with the same date interests. She's getting 10 random emails per day. It is going to take her up to 10 days before she comes across that same 1 guy. Heck, she might come across him in day 1, too, or it might take all 10. Point is, it's difficult to see how she's somehow better off than woman #1, if time is a factor (and for most people, it is, because life is short).

That's not to say I don't get what's being said. I've received maybe 20 first contact emails (for theoretical dating reasons) since I joined POF. I think one of them was a tennis ball (although I've already mentioned her in this thread, so she's obviously a little flaky, but besides the flakiness, she's a tennis ball) -- I've had 19 worthless golf balls. Nevertheless, 1 out of 20 wouldn't be bad at all in this game -- if that's over the course of a day, a week, even a month and not THREE FREAKIN' YEARS. How could a woman with a similar ratio of tennis balls to golf balls who is receiving 100 messages a day, a week, a month, how could she possibly not be better off than me?

Quite frankly, if you are so picky dating-wise that you can't find one random guy out of 100 worth dating, then you've got bigger problems than POF. So just assuming none of you women are THAT picky, then the problem is the lack of randomness of your emails, which would seem to be, again, some sort of issue with your profile, pictures, restrictions, something, considering other women of similar attractiveness have far less trouble finding a date (not "The One" but just a DATE) on the site. I will grant, if you are only using POF to find just THE ONE, then I will probably end up going on a date as a result of POF before you will. (I should also point out, I don't think it's possible, even if THE ONE does exist, to figure out if someone is THE ONE from an email and a profile, and you actually need to meet people in order to figure that out.)

Mr. Evil: That's a bloody good post.
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 90
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/11/2010 3:57:38 PM
I would agree with the dry statistical approach if we were machines dealing things in an orderly and manageable manner but we are not and a person takes a different view of messages when they have to deal with 100 per day vs one per day. Who knows if you are on the high end of the volume scale you may just be too tired and impatient to spot that special one.

On the contrary, it's absolutely a dry statistical angle to claim that out of 100 you have a better shot at finding what you want in a dating scene anyway - so the fact that it's totally subjective to the fact that it's possible to get 100 a day and still have a low percentage of them be considerable.

As Mr. Evil stated - if a woman experiences a guy she's not sure about, she'd rather stand back and let him pass. Why would she do otherwise if she's lukewarm about someone? To kill time? There are always exceptions, but IMO more men will go ahead and date a woman who's cute without checking to see what else comes with the package, while more women will try and see beyond the cuteness of a guy what he's about.

IMO the difference is often that a woman will remain single until a guy really wows her, while a lot of men for some reason feel they have to (or should) work with what they get. Not choosing anything is an option, but often men don't go with it. *shrug*
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 91
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/11/2010 4:48:50 PM

Yes. But where do you go over 40?

I'm 42 (yesterday) and I can think of about 15 places I was in the last two days I saw the opposite sex in. Everywhere you go is game as a guy if there are women there and you're engaging and know how to casually strike up conversations.
 CoolBreezez
Joined: 8/20/2006
Msg: 92
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/11/2010 5:30:03 PM

IMO the difference is often that a woman will remain single until a guy really wows her, while a lot of men for some reason feel they have to (or should) work with what they get. Not choosing anything is an option, but often men don't go with it. *shrug*


This is often the way I look at it- nice summary WIP. Some men look with a good better best doing a market survey and take what it is offering. Many women have a pass/fail criteria, sort of an all or nothing. They can be content just living life and taking what comes at them were as the men continual seek until they find. It like testosterone vs estrogen- one makes for aggression and hunting- the other, softer and passive. Millions of sperm had to go find that egg to make you.


As Mr. Evil stated - if a woman experiences a guy she's not sure about, she'd rather stand back and let him pass. Why would she do otherwise if she's lukewarm about someone? To kill time? There are always exceptions, but IMO more men will go ahead and date a woman who's cute without checking to see what else comes with the package, while more women will try and see beyond the cuteness of a guy what he's about.


And from this I say the medium is flawed. There is no get to know you- its basically a one shot deal so if you don't connect, your done and off to the next audition.

We all want to find out whats in the box- and men will try and open up a lot of boxes- lol- while women like to find the right wrapping paper first and ponder the possibilities before looking in.
 RushLuv
Joined: 4/16/2009
Msg: 93
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/11/2010 6:09:38 PM

Unless a man look like a top model, he gets the read and delete 99% of times. That’s when they don’t get the unread and delete, once they look at their profile pic.


I can't speak for other women, but I know for sure that I haven't seen any top models on this site since joining nearly two years ago. It isn't always about deleting because of lack of attraction.

I can't even begin to tell you how many emails I deleted from men I considered attractive, but their profiles were lacking big time. That's right. Either their profiles looked like crap, or we didn't have anything in common but the deletes mainly came from their profiles looking like crap.

This one reads profile, and I don't care how attractive a man is. If he doesn't at least have a decent looking profile (which includes more than 5 sentences), I'm not interested. I can't stand half assed profiles.


They can afford to raise their standards (at least, they believe they can) considering the large amount of messages they receive.


In case you aren't aware of this, online dating is like a buffet. People pick and choose. Why? Because just like a buffet, there is variety to choose from.


Casinos love when fools believe that the greater the number of times you pull the lever/push the button on the slot machine, the greater your odds of success.


Good analogy. Personally, I don't think a large number of emails mean squat. I bet even the most attractive people on online dating sites can have some of the worst luck.
 ChancesRMD
Joined: 4/11/2009
Msg: 95
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/11/2010 10:22:59 PM
I have read this and some similar threads like this before and found alot of the results and responses surprising.

IMO there was always factors such as geographics and the unknown, such as what guys are writing in their emails, that produced results like 600 emails to get 5 dates. I would be more inclined to agree that it might take 600 dates to find one S.O.

My profile practically says "go away" to most people. I am average looking at best. I seldom send the first email unless.....I have something of substance to say. If I had to guess, I would say if I sent out 100 emails...95 would respond. But like I said. I don't send out stupid emails like you are hot, hi or let's meet. I would trash those same emails if a woman sent it to me.

Even with the lousy profile and the average looks I get emailed first on a daily basis. Often times pursuing a meeting. And it's not just me. I have talked to some males in my area that have said the same thing.
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 96
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/12/2010 7:59:53 AM
I don't really see how my argument is any different than the MANY (including quite a few in this thread arguing against me) that claim that the reason most men aren't successful on this site is because their profiles suck (though oddly, two posts above this one a guy points out that he's successful on this site even though his profile DOES suck!). Why would this not be true with women as well? What you guys are basically saying is that women are not successful on this site because MEN suck.

Understand, I'm not criticizing people for sticking to their guns. I'm just not sure people should be complaining about the results that come about from sticking to your guns.

Thanks, Mr. Fication -- check that stuff out a little later. If I had time, I'd chime in on this "settling" stuff, but gotta run off to shoot a movie!
 Paddy_o_Lantern
Joined: 12/9/2009
Msg: 97
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/12/2010 9:48:07 AM
I don't really see how my argument is any different than the MANY (including quite a few in this thread arguing against me) that claim that the reason most men aren't successful on this site is because their profiles suck (though oddly, two posts above this one a guy points out that he's successful on this site even though his profile DOES suck!). Why would this not be true with women as well? What you guys are basically saying is that women are not successful on this site because MEN suck.



The successful fellow you refer to was critical of his own profile but to my knowledge his profile was not rated by a statistically significant population of POF women. I suspect they would have a more generous appraisal of his profile based on his stated success. It is difficult to make objective comparions based on subjective self assessments. Being outwardly critical of your own profile on here is a good way to draw attention to it though.
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 98
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/12/2010 10:02:35 AM

This is often the way I look at it- nice summary WIP. Some men look with a good better best doing a market survey and take what it is offering. Many women have a pass/fail criteria, sort of an all or nothing. They can be content just living life and taking what comes at them were as the men continual seek until they find. It like testosterone vs estrogen- one makes for aggression and hunting- the other, softer and passive. Millions of sperm had to go find that egg to make you.

It's more like more women will only date if/when they see someone they WANT to date, whereas men will go for the date and hope it works. Again, there are always exceptions to that, but IME, men have more of a base agenda to pair off first and match with someone second, where more women will forego dating altogether if no one she's into comes into the picture. NOT because she's got more options, but because - why date if there's no one currently around you WANT to date? I know I'd rather crack a book than fill my nights up with guys to date just cause they're there. I assume they'd be happier if I didn't waste their time as well. Win-win. The mindset that we all must seek to pair off every second of life to be accepted as part of the pack in the first place isn't a healthy one. Ironically, it also gets you worse results - women tend to like guys that DON'T have that mindset, and those guys date more (and if they don't, they don't really notice or care. Bonus.).

And from this I say the medium is flawed. There is no get to know you- its basically a one shot deal so if you don't connect, your done and off to the next audition.

Well if you're not into what someone looks like - OR you are but their profile shows other traits missing you're looking for (and yes, what someone writes and how they write DOES show character traits you may or may not want regardless of whether or not people like it), what do you need to get to know?

We all want to find out whats in the box- and men will try and open up a lot of boxes- lol- while women like to find the right wrapping paper first and ponder the possibilities before looking in.

More often than not, the wrapping choice, the way it's wrapped and the way the wrapping is presented in the end is pretty much what you thought it was at first sight, once you decide to look deeper. I know I've looked beyond the wrapping many times to be fair and realized what I saw was pretty much what I got.

I can't speak for other women, but I know for sure that I haven't seen any top models on this site since joining nearly two years ago. It isn't always about deleting because of lack of attraction.

I can't even begin to tell you how many emails I deleted from men I considered attractive, but their profiles were lacking big time. That's right. Either their profiles looked like crap, or we didn't have anything in common but the deletes mainly came from their profiles looking like crap.

This one reads profile, and I don't care how attractive a man is. If he doesn't at least have a decent looking profile (which includes more than 5 sentences), I'm not interested. I can't stand half assed profiles.

Exactly - not only have I not seen top models here (barring men who post someone else's professional model pics for responses) I haven't seen any walking around randomly offline either. I'd remember it if I did.

I too may like a guy's look, but I know better than to not look further. There are some traits I like in a guy beyond looks - and they're dealbreakers if not there. There are also pet peeves. They are also pretty obvious from a profile...how a profile is written can give me a HUGE amount of information about the guy. Laziness, lack of intelligence, no sense of humor, frustration/desperation, issues with women (or everyone), lack of realism, dishonesty, etc are easily spotted in text if you know what you're looking at.

The thing that's "wrong" with these woman, using Woman in Progress's tennis ball/golf ball analogy, is that they want to play tennis, and men are tossing golf balls at them.

Telling her "Play Golf!" or "Play Tennis with Golf Balls!" is insisting or suggesting that she play along with you, using your object of the game, your rules, your moves, and your strategies, and that she ignore what she actually wants to do, and what she believes works for her, which is play tennis with tennis balls. The wanting to play tennis isn't what's "wrong" here.

In reality, what's wrong is Person A clinging to the idea that Person B should see things and do things according to how Person A sees things and does things.
Ain't gonna happen, so for Person A's own good, he/she might wanna just let go of that. Or not. Whatever "works" for ya.

Yes, perhaps for her own good, she should say "I'm only interested in playing tennis" in her profile, assuming she hasn't already. But it would be ridiculous to expect that she add, for the convenience of the obtuse, "and I only want to play actual tennis on a genuine clay or grass tennis court with a real tennis net, using real tennis balls and a real tennis racquet that fits my grip."

Regardless, many women using POF tell us that no matter what she puts in her profile, she's still going to get non-matches contacting her about playing whatever game he wants, or playing tennis with golf balls, soccer balls, footballs, basketballs, nerfballs, cans of tuna, and clods of dirt. A sport is a sport, so it should make no difference to her, right?

Love all of this, and the rest of her post - and I agree wholeheartedly with it. If a man feels he needs to tell women they should consider more men it's usually because it's important to men that she does and serves his purpose of being considered (let's be honest - women who don't consider men they're not overly interested in doesn't bother them, so why do men care what her standards are? Yep, it's a projection of "him" getting a better shot from his end - and doesn't usually benefit "her" much if at all.). Men who come up to me/message me and ask me what I want to know about them are obviously interested in me and hoping I want to know about them so they can tell me what they want me to know. None of that's about me, really.

Men who want women into tennis to just play no matter what the rules are do so in hopes that their results will be better even though they don't own any of the tennis equipment she's looking for, plain and simple.
 Paddy_o_Lantern
Joined: 12/9/2009
Msg: 99
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/12/2010 10:18:03 AM
If as some of the ladies have stated it is more about the writing and content of a man's profile than it is his pictures. Then men who feel they are not doing well on here may consider having someone help them with thier profiles as they would have someone help with thier resume when applying for work. I personally think dating should should be a little more fun and natural than looking for work but with an online application for a first response there are many parallels.
 DivineBovine
Joined: 5/13/2005
Msg: 100
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/12/2010 10:22:19 AM

i've seen those same women you are talking about, all the time. They put up a pissy headline like you mentioned. "Thinking about deleting this" or "sick of the bs on here" yet write them a well thought out email and you get nothing in return. Those women evidently are extremely picky, feel owed, or are expecting George Clooney to email them. Don't even bother emailing them anymore, let them wallow in their own misery


i've seen men with headlines like this too, with exactly the same picky sense of entitlement but they're waiting for Megan Fox to send them an email.

they also have profiles saying little to nothing but emphatically stating that they don't want gold-diggers or fatties. and their acceptable age range goes from 21 to 40 - even if they're in their 50s.

the word "delusional" comes to mind...

 ChancesRMD
Joined: 4/11/2009
Msg: 102
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/12/2010 2:03:27 PM

Unless you know what a woman is looking for and have seen the profiles of men who contacted her, then you don't have enough info to form any type of reasonable assessment about why a woman is unable to find dates when she has a lot of emails. In general, I would say this is a combination of quantity and quality. More emails from quality men would increase the chances of a woman finding someone.


Agreed. A good reason why pwople shouldn't get too upset when they are rejected. We all have our criteria, so we certainly shouldn't blame someone when we aren't their cup of tea.

I guess I was more focused on the subject of 600 emails to get 5 dates. You all took it even deeper and I will have to say I loved the analogies and thought your comments were a good read.

IMO you do increase your chances by having a good profile and good pictures. You increase them even more if you actually have some commonly desiarable traits and interests.

The part I can't get passed is 600 emails to get 5 dates. The email can be just as important as the profile and the pictures. Think about some of the emails that you delete. Sometimes even without looking at the senders picture or profile.

Here are some examples of emails I got that I would delete.

Where do you live? Or how far away from me are you? My thought? You obviously didn't bother looking at my profile as my location is there. And have you ever heard of Mapquest or Google Maps? It just say they put no effort into the email. Not a good first impression.

Hi? How are you today? Nice hair, eyes smile or whatever. Again, it's looking like you want me to look at your profile and be the one to strike up a conversation. If this was real life the respoonse would be "Hi", "Fine thanks. How are you". Or on the compliment "thanks".

I'm saying if people would put some effort and thoughtfulness into their emails, that this too would increase their chances of a response.

It's like applying for a job. If you are writing 600 cover letters to get 5 interviews you should probably look at both your resume and the cover letter that introduces you. Unless of course you are applying for a job in this economy, in which case those odds are pretty normal.
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 103
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/12/2010 2:31:15 PM

The problem with women, is they would rather not date, so they never know if there is chemistry and attraction. Cause they used their "women's intuition" and "crystal ball" and "comprehension skills" from a pic and a 150-200 word profile to discern whether johnny would be a good human being! hahahaha!!!!

I'm going to disagree here. Attraction has to be in place in order to want to date someone as far as I knew...beyond that chemistry is important once attraction is established - and for that yeah, it takes time to determine it's there or not. One without the other is either f*ckbuddy material, or a good partner to play checkers with. You kind of need both to even consider a relationship that's legitimate.

Intuition, crystal balls and extreme comprehension skills aren't needed to look at profiles around here. Unless you want to date more than you care to look for a good match. Then I guess you can date whoever messages you and try to sort everything out in person. Why would anyone want to date when they don't see anyone in front of them that makes them WANT to? Any other way, it's pulling teeth, and going through the motions. Dating is supposed to be fun, and it is when you like someone enough to want to actually date them.

It's totally possible to know whether or not you like looking at someone based on a pic and it's also possible to find out enough from a profile to know if you want to know more. It's also possible to like one of those things but not the other in the same profile, and if that's the case - why would it not be an elimination? And I'm sure you were being humorous, but whether or not a human being is good isn't necessarily connected with whether or not he's good for you or someone you want to date.

As I said, if you are receiving less than 5 answers in 100 emails. Try and fix your profile, change your emails, add some different sh1t. If your STILL getting the same results. Relax, enjoy your membership(free), post on the forums, send a few emails if you see someone you like, answer women who email you. BUT STOP EXPECTING THIS TO WORK FOR YOU. Get out there IRL, where your personality will shine through, where women see you alone, not as one of her 25 emails today.

Now THIS I can agree with, and I'd like to add "don't expect ANYTHING to work for you" - just get to know people , enjoy life and let things happen when they will. This isn't a poor option, but it ISN'T a main one. IRL is much better, I agree - I think online only works for those who succeed in other places. It's not going to work different for you here than everywhere else - all you'll do here is catch people you may not already bump into. That's it.
 DivineBovine
Joined: 5/13/2005
Msg: 105
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/12/2010 3:13:56 PM
mr. evil, with all due respect... you're wrong.

the women who are "4"s aren't getting emailed.

and some women have emailed hundreds of men to the same dead end that men reach.

as for this:


Many of you mentioned that SOME women have those "damn I bored with the men on here" headers on their profile. Now one poster said "so do men". Nuh-uh, sorry, no cigar, you don't get the cuppie doll honey!


a) since you're going to whinge about fat chicks who think Haagen Das is a foreign language, it's KEWPIE doll - HONEY!

b) i have no doubt that some women have headlines that say "tired of players", "does this thing really work", "i'm deleting myself tomorrow", but that doesn't mean that men don't too.

more than a few times, i've read profiles of men on this site and they read like "A Guy's Guide to Bitterness".


You want to date the guy who totally excites you, or has edge to him. BUT he's the guy who plays you!


and you want to date the woman who totally excites you or is SOOOOOOOO hot! but they're the ones more interested in the size of your wallet! and they'll play you too.

there are people who behave badly on both sides of the gender fence.


...no women can disagree. (...) No not all women, probably just 75%.


so 25% of us can disagree, then.


Women use this more as a "poor option" and "a compliment finder" for when she feels down.


"compliment finder"???? i've had more random put-downs from men on online dating sites (and from a few women too, what's up with that?) than i have in real life. it's like the anonymity of a computer screen makes them revert to schoolyard bullies....
 Paddy_o_Lantern
Joined: 12/9/2009
Msg: 106
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/12/2010 3:15:45 PM
Wake up guys!! Your the only one filling their heads with sh1t, if they think they're so great, it's because you made it so. So sophie armed with "dilusion" will have the last laugh, as long as YOU act desperate. Thik about it.


No new news here but we do forget about this sometimes and we only have ourselves to blame if we are acting desperate. Desperation is the worst enemy of those looking to date or find work. All other things being equal those who can market themselves the best will have the most success.
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 107
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/12/2010 3:35:14 PM

Online dating will not change, it is a stacked deck for women.

Yes, it is. I think of it as a bar that is not just a singles bar but "Singles Only; Prepared to be Hit On". But a sausage-fest version at the same time. It is how it is, nobody can complain their way out of it, I agree.

most men write 100's of emails, women write few if at all.

Yep... like you would expect from a "Singles Only, Pick Em Up" bar. It'd be the guys doing the initial contact, yep.

it's that the majority of women use their coveted "chase me" status, to stack the deck.

Well, to be fair, women aren't USING any status. Many just don't want to make initial contact. Some guys are too shy to really do so, just like you may find at a bar, too. It is a little more open for approaching, even for women, than a bar -- even a Singles Only bar. However, yeah, when it comes to initial emails, the deck is stacked.

That's why sophie who is 5'2" weighs in at 165, watches game shows, has a 2 line profile, the only thing she knows in foreign language is Hagen Dazs and looks a lot like Rosanne Barr gets 10 emails a week. CAUSE ALL THE GUYS WRITE TO EVERY WOMAN THEY CAN!!!

Hilarious. In all seriousness though, not all guys will every to EVERY woman he can... but I agree with where you're going with it. Guys "take what the defense gives them" more than women do, generally speaking. They may not have the balls in front of everyone at a bar to fraternize with Sophie to walk out the door with her... but they will more apt to have the balls to do that online.

I know some people hate the term "league", but here's what I mean in my context of it (based on the context I most often hear it in), since we're on the topic of numbers & probability: Everyone has a variable Dating Value. An unemployed trucker with missing teeth has less value than the average Joe. Average Joe has less value than a guy making 6 figures, a sculpted body, and lot going for himself and the way he carries himself. In just about every environment. But that varies to some degree.

One's Dating Value is based on how the opposite sex values them. The value goes up when there's scarcity (supply and demand).

I once heard a woman say that some guys come on POF to boost their ego, which, directly speaking, I disagree with. If there's anything gender-based, it's women who's egos would go up, because, their Dating Value goes up in ANY environment of Singles-Only where there's a sausage fest. I once went on Spring Break to a place in FL and it was oddly a total sausage fest. I saw guys pretty ripped walk out with ladies who mine as well be carrying some Hagen Daz in her purse. Why? Her Dating (attractive) Value went up.

Your average Jane, 5/10, is going to be a 7/10 on here. Doesn't mean every guy's tastes change dramatically as the value... but there are a lot of guys who want to take what they can get (and tolerate), and enough for HER value to go up.

Can you really blame sophie for having an inflated ego, almost as big as her azz?

Nope. Guys would be the same way if the roles were reversed.

So she goes out on a few dates, some guy rolls her in the hay, she gets pizzed off, she thought her "9" was going to stay forever, with her a "4".

I wouldn't say 4/10 looking gals are picking up 9/10 guys out of the woodwork... but I get what you're saying. I'd say the gap is not quite that bad, but it IS at least possible to happen, just not too often. I'd say it'd be more like a 6/10 gal getting the 8s and 9s of guys... because she becomes an 8 or 9 of value on here.

And I think the problem is, that gal will think that's her overall long-running value... it's not. It's just environmentally-based inflation. :) Just like the ripped guys on Sausage Spring Break periodically leaving with spongy women, if they happened to live within driving distance back home coincidentally, she shouldn't be shocked that he doesn't want to date her.

On here, a guy will be MORE APT to go out on a date with a gal who COMPARATIVELY appears to be higher than she's worth. Guys will be more apt to take what the defense gives them... the gal will think that's her long-term Dating Value, when it's just environmental inflation.
 DivineBovine
Joined: 5/13/2005
Msg: 109
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/12/2010 4:58:21 PM

If you were in Toronto, you'd do fine.


not even close... in Toronto, at this age, my odds would be even worse than they are here.

i lived there for many years before moving to Ottawa. 2 major cities with populations in excess of a million people and i rarely dated - not for lack of trying.


I doubt you go very long without a date.


last one was February. before that, November...

944man said he might get 2 or 3 emails a week earlier in this thread - if i got that many initial contacts in a month, that would be amazing.


As for men and their negative profiles, it's 95% of the time resulted from and endless onslaught of read/delete or unread/delete.


the ones i've seen aren't complaining about non-responsive fishies, they're complaining about women who use them. much as women complain about men who use them. it works both ways.


The huge difference is most men, will date a woman they consider attractive


a walking toothpick with huge bazoomas?



most men will also put up with being treated badly by a woman if she looks so good that their friends are impressed.

so who's really losing out? the person who wants the shiny package on the outside to hell with what's inside or the person with the qualifiers?
 CoolBreezez
Joined: 8/20/2006
Msg: 110
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/12/2010 6:23:39 PM
DB my fellow Canadian Londoner,

From my perspective, the pond is drying up here. Small pool and hardly anything new. Probably about 300 active profiles -up to "been online last 30 days" around a generous age span (40 - 55). There aren't even 600 profiles to write to get 5 dates. In a way, I feel luck to get what I have.

As far as dates,


last one was February. before that, November...


Umm let me count mine in that time span.... umm ..........zero.

Replies to my emails and (GASP) unsolicited emails- about 5. How you would feel with results like that?

No matter what you say- men generally have it worse on here.

Frankly- women generally are much more disinterested in dating or even getting to know anyone from here. Least I have one penpal here. That's like a victory in itself.

As far as carpet bombing women from afar, been there done that- had some fun trips but like most LDRs- didn't really work.

But what to do?- Its like trying to fight the weather- as someone said- it is what it is.

Real life is good and least you get to meet people, except for I don't seem to cross paths with very many available women around my age here. It's a student town and all the eateries and bars cater to the 20's crowd.

But I'll just keep soldiering along and take what I get- least I know I'm not alone here on the forums.


Show ALL Forums  > Dating Experiences  >