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: 111
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???Page 4 of 21    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21)
To further clarify what I was trying to say before I had to rush off to "work":

A couple weeks ago I was on Match and came across the profile of a woman who I had previously emailed on Plenty of Fish, some months ago with no response. Her pictures and "about me" section were almost identical on both sites: very well-written (she is a professional creative writer, like me), quite entertaining, with many similarities to me, and her description of the type of guy she was looking for could have easily been me, because it was entirely about his personality ("smart," "funny," etc., the usual). But I can't say I was surprised she didn't write me back, because no fellow writer has ever written me back on POF (quite a different story on nearly all other dating sites).

Anyway, to get more to the point, the one primary difference between her POF profile and her Match profile is that Match has forced listed preferences for various categories. And under ethnicity, the only one selected was "white" and under minimum height, she had selected 5'9" (although she herself is 5'0"). She made no mention of these preferences or qualifications or deal-breakers or whatsoever in her POF profile -- because had she, I can promise you, *I* would not have wasted time emailing her, when I have thousands of other women I could have potentially been emailing.

Perhaps you've heard that story before, because I've mentioned it a time or two. But here's the other side of that: if she was a forum dweller, she'd probably be in this thread right now, saying something like, "This site sucks! Yeah, sure, I'm getting like 100 emails but they're all golf balls and I want to play tennis!"

Well, you know what? THIS golf ball would have cut down on all those annoying golf ball emails by one had you simply declared in your profile that you were only interested in tennis balls. And I imagine I probably wouldn't have been alone, because although SOME guys won't bother reading your profile, I'm willing to bet MOST guys do, and then actually follow the rules they are given -- if for no other reason, because it is HIGHLY inefficient to do otherwise!

But you'll never know unless you actually put in your profile, "Golf balls, stay the hell away from me." (In slightly more diplomatic language.) And well over 90% of the profiles I come across on POF don't do that. But that seems to completely contradict the results over on Match, where over 90% of the profiles I come across DO tell this golf ball to stay the hell away from them. Some people claim there is no difference between Match and POF except for the cost. Well, there's one other MAJOR difference right there: I can email over 90% of POF profiles... I can email less than 10% of Match profiles. And as with the woman I just mentioned, the exact same person can be a "Yes" on POF, but a "No" on Match... and guess which one is the more likely truth?

I know, I know -- we've tangled over this before. Women have PLENTY of good reasons not to tell golf balls "don't bother emailing me." In some other recent thread, someone even pointed out he wouldn't email a woman who said in her profile that she was only interested in dating white men -- even though he was a white man! That was because he just figured he'd have nothing in common with someone who had such a "racist attitude." So by putting "no golf balls" in your profile, you risk turning off possibly a significant number of "tennis balls" simply because saying "no golf balls" might be a bad reflection on your personality.

I'm not saying it's a winnable situation (welcome to my world!). I'm just saying, if you really want to cut back on all those crappy golf balls emailing you, you certainly have the power to do something about it besides just complain that globs of golf balls are emailing you. It may very well decrease the likelihood of a few tennis balls emailing you, but, oh, well. The point is, the main reason you're getting a bunch of golf balls emailing you is because your profile is inadequate -- it's not telling the well-behaved golf balls like me not to email you. Because I'll be damned if any of us well-behaved golf balls would. And the bad golf balls would email you regardless of what you wrote in your profile.

Of course, that's the negative way of looking at things -- how you can stop a significant amount of "junk" mail on POF. What about the positive spin? How do you get more tennis balls to email you?

I don't think you can. If you're a fairly attractive woman and you have a positive, upbeat, inviting profile -- that is the best you can do. So it all goes back to one of my previous posts: if you want a tennis ball, then you better email him yourself when you see him. Because chances are, it's going to work out for you (well, in the sense that you'd get a response -- whether he's going to be "The One" or not is another story). Again, in a major metro, there are THOUSANDS of active profiles to sift through. Even a cut-and-paste guy could never get through all of them before a few thousand more popped up (seriously, it's mathematically impossible, because of the 40 per day first contact email limit). There's only so much advanced search can cut down those numbers, and as Mr. Fication points out, that's actually working against you! You could easily miss that perfect person because you are one inch off on your height search, or that perfect person declared herself to be "a few extra pounds" when she is in fact "average." If you're in a major market, the vast majority of men, even in your age bracket, are never going to see your profile, just by random luck (as the search functions list by last online, which is just random luck -- your perfect guy could be missing you every time because you're 12 hours off from each other). And even if he does somehow see your profile, he might think to himself (as I've thought so many times myself), "Wow, this girl is out of my league. Life is short, no time to waste an email here, gotta move onto the next one." Maybe he has no idea what he's talking about. Maybe he is a tennis ball. Maybe you should tell him that. Because if you don't, you two are never going to communicate.

I'm just saying, as I see it, that's just pretty much the only real fix to the hundred golf balls problem: email a tennis ball yourself. Which, given the assertiveness of the women in this thread, I assume most probably are doing, but you're only 1% of POF users and most women aren't, hence the reason so many of both genders consider this site to be a failure.

I'm not addressing most of that other stuff addressed to me, because it's really going way off on a tangent with all this "embedded" crap, and again, life is short and I have to go back to work in several hours. But on this "settling" tangent, how many times have we heard a woman say, "Sure, he's not the most handsome man on earth, but he makes me laugh, he's so gentle and sweet, blah blah blah." I honestly wouldn't be bothered too much if my significant other didn't find me all that physically attractive -- in fact, at this point in my life, I'd wonder about her sanity if she said such a thing (almost every woman that has come out of nowhere with a compliment for one of my physical attributes has been a little odd to say the least and generally not someone I'd want to date, jinx excluded, ironically enough given our hostility in this thread). I'm pretty sure I was liked for something else besides my physical attributes in most of my dating situations, and I'm fine with that, because I know I'm not particularly attractive. I actually can't ever recall having my face or body complimented by any of the three women I was in year+ relationships with. Did not bother me one iota. But I think the other way around, I've run into issues -- I refuse to lie about such things and won't compliment a woman about her physical attractiveness unless I find her physically attractive, so, yeah, that's created some problems with some of the far-less-than-1-year-relationships I've had. So I can see the other side of that. But because I can't figure out my league to save my life, it's not really something I worry about. I'm attracted to a very large percentage of women (compared to most guys) within my age bracket, so on POF at least, I've never gotten to the point where I had to email someone I wasn't attracted to because there was no one else left to email.

HOWEVER, I've only found 2 or 3 of the women that sent me first contact emails to be even remotely attractive, so, yeah -- although I've actually written back almost everyone that's written me except for the clearly insane, I can't say that I tried very hard to keep the communication going with any of them that I didn't find attractive, for the very reason Coma White describes. But I really feel like that only works consistently one way gender-wise, because of what quite a few others have already said in this thread: women go beyond mere physical attraction, while men don't have trouble dating someone for attraction reasons only... and it's not wise to date someone you're NOT physically attracted to if you're a man. I've learned that the hard way. But women can make it work somehow. Naturally I can't argue with that, or else I probably would have made it into my 30s without having ever been in a relationship.
 DivineBovine
Joined: 5/13/2005
Msg: 112
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 5:44:59 AM

...the main reason you're getting a bunch of golf balls emailing you is because your profile is inadequate...


nice theory, Hawking, but no.

the main reason the golf balls email is because they don't read the profile and simply respond to a picture.

using my profile as the example, i do say that i'm not interested in a long-distance relationship. my last 3 serious relationships were LDRS (and i've had a few before that) and i know from painful personal experience that they're difficult to maintain. i also say that i don't like facial hair on men.

and more often than not, the emails that i do get come from men who look like the long-lost 4th member of ZZ Top living hundreds of kilometres away!
 RushLuv
Joined: 4/16/2009
Msg: 113
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 7:43:00 AM

I seriously think most women here are not interested in meeting anyone.


I've been on this site for nearly two years, and my last POF date was this past February. Even though I had meet & greets planned afterwards, I encountered a number of flakes, especially during the month of March. But flakes aren't the the main reason why I couldn't care less about meeting anyone off of here. I happen to find interacting with men IRL, a much better fit. I even mentioned on my profile, that I am perfectly fine with not having met anyone since this past February.

Yes, there are women on POF that aren't here to meet anyone and clearly the same thing can be said about some (if not most) men.
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 114
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 8:31:52 AM

nice theory, Hawking, but no.

the main reason the golf balls email is because they don't read the profile and simply respond to a picture.

Exactly. In my tennis/golf ball scenario - I was referring to women who plainly state they want to play tennis - and men who have golf balls responding. Jinx added the part where men complain that women who want tennis should consider playing with whatever's thrown at them in an attempt to be considered by tennis oriented profiles.

Obviously the women who want tennis would be making it clear they are there looking for tennis partners. Whether men don't care, don't read the details, or know it but don't want to be left out - who knows.

Well...I may be underestimating here, but I swear, my carefully crafted message almost always resulted in an "unread/delete" response.
Guess how long it took for me to actually "get the picture" here? Not long.

What picture? That women who aren't interested won't care what you write? Sure - but women who might be interested won't respond to a cut and paste or one liner, for the most part. Where guys get the idea that all carefully constructed messages (whatever that means) will guarantee them a response is beyond me - but men here continue to post stories about what they did and what they didn't get from it.

Obviously if a woman is interested AND likes your pic AND your profile AND you send the right message then you'll get your response, and that still doesn't guaranee a date or a relationship, it's just the best scenario for a woman to respond. One or more of those things can't be missing for that formula to work. Sending really good messages to women who aren't interested for one reason or another does NOT prove that women don't want to date, women don't respond to effort, or anything else - all it proves is that you need more than that great message to get a result.

I seriously think most women here are not interested in meeting anyone.

Based on your personal experiences - all women don't want dates on POF? Whoa, that's a good stretch...if that ain't a projection I don't know what is.

In person, I can get a date. I'm multi-dimensional there, witty, cute, charming.
On POF I'm nothing more than a crappy picture to be discarded without a second thought.

Good. Maybe men will realize that POF and other dating sites ARE NOT SUBSTITUTES for offline social activity - and that if they're getting dates offline, then they should stick to what's working and not take POF so seriously. If in person works better for you - then why change that?
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 116
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 11:20:51 AM

Overall the patterns showed that men were fine with taking long shots (rejection), while women stuck more with a 'sure thing'.

Makes sense. Comparatively speaking, online or IRL, you'll find the same.

THIS golf ball would have cut down on all those annoying golf ball emails by one had you simply declared in your profile that you were only interested in tennis balls.

No, you're absolutely right. Others are pointing out that they write in their profile to ward off any golf-balls, but they still write. Yeah, that will happen, especially on a free site like this. BUT you're correct, pointing it out CLEARLY would avoid a lot of it. On Match, they have it listed in a separate preferences list. A gal mentioning within a paragraph in her profile "i like guys taller than me" or "i prefer guys being white" can be missed out on.

And of course, gals going out of their way, showing their frustration in their profile getting golf-balls no matter what, will scare good catch guys. She wouldn't have to have any bouty-bouty attitude about it... she could just write it at the bottom of her profile, separated, as if it was part of the site -- just a list of what we don't have here:

My Dating Requirements in a Guy:*
Height: 5'9 - 6'4"
Body Type: Average, Thin, or Athletic
Occupation: Employed & Financially Secure
Ethnicity: White
Religion: Not religious or Non-Fundamentalist
Politics: No Preference
Kids: Has none
Smoke: Doesn't or trying to quit
Drink: Drinks but not more than 3 times a week
*If you do not meet these basic requirements, I will have to delete the email and not respond.

(See how that stands out? Now I look gay by putting it up there as a mere example. But it catches the eye, right? You'll still get golf-balls, I'm sure.. but what Hawking points out -- a lot would be wiltered away, with no excuse of missing it by skim reading)
 Paddy_o_Lantern
Joined: 12/9/2009
Msg: 117
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 11:27:42 AM
Again after reading WIP's post, I go to "the rules are, there are no rules!"


Finally back to the heart of the matter. Everyone's experience is different on here some have success some don' t etc etc. Boils down to so many factors as individual as the posters. Comes down to how well you market yourself, what you have to market, how realistic you are being about what you are looking for, where you are looking, what your motives are etc. The first thing I learned about online dating and dating IRL in new millenium is that there are few rules and as a result alot less etiquette than there used to be IRL. It seems to me you need to be a salesman with a thick skin to succeed out there and not end up feeling snubbed these days. Lots of suggestion have been mentioned to improve your chance online and in real life but it is difficult to compare one persons experience to anothers without all the facts.
 CoolBreezez
Joined: 8/20/2006
Msg: 118
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 1:47:22 PM
From what I've seen so far, there's a different reality for men and women on here. I think trying to describe our experiences to the opposite gender is still interpreted through your own genders eyes.

It is like our clothes shopping habits. Men more than women will go into the store, find what they need, take what is offered, buy it and leave. Women will hit several stores try stuff on over and over- making it into a huge event. Women generally love clothes shopping more as evidenced by the 10 to 1 men's to women's clothes store ratio. They are very discerning about what they buy and also have more variety to chose from. From men availability of desired clothes is limited and they make due (or they don't get to wear shoes. From this women wonder why men wear plain stuff and men wonder why women spend so much time shopping.

The advertised ratio on here is 1.5 to 1 men to women. Doesn't sound so bad until you start scaling it up. There are 1000 women for every 1500 men here and that varies by area. If everyone paired off, 500 men would be left single.You or choice is to be left behind single or try something to get your self in the mix.

Somehow, I don't think people would come here if they had a full social calendar/ desirable dates lined up in real life. To ask them to walk away and remain single is not a choice. Learning to be happy with yourself is one thing, but choosing permanent isolation instead is not normal. Many people want to be paired up.

In real life, with the ratio of men to women to be 1 to 1, that nature designed us to pair off. But in internet dating, many of us are chasing the same thing- attraction, status and personality. The 80/20 rule seems to hold for both genders- 20% of the people get 80% of the attention. It just makes you believe that this does not work the same as real life.

Maybe its smell, maybe behavioral clues that we can't pick up on through a computer screen. Or maybe the media has us convinced that everyone out there looks like movie stars and we should be able to find one for ourselves.
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 119
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 2:08:47 PM

The advertised ratio on here is 1.5 to 1 men to women.

I just did a quick count for my area -- of people online today. Sunday late afternoon, that should be a good indicator of active users as far as comparisons go. Guys hit 31 pages. Girls hit 12. I on the other side of the state, in a more populated area in a burb-city with only a 10 mile radius: Guys pages was OVER the max of 35, girls 16. I selected body type of Average, Slim, Athletic to narrow the search (and by what most would desire as a bonus). And I put ages 21-35, the popular age range. I'm sure it varies for different age ranges.

I could buy that there's a 1.5 ratio or around that, as far as people who have made an account here. But as far as active people are concerned, I would say it's over a 2:1 ratio -- so a bit more sausage on the sandwich, right? lol
 CoolBreezez
Joined: 8/20/2006
Msg: 121
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 4:41:57 PM

I could buy that there's a 1.5 ratio or around that, as far as people who have made an account here. But as far as active people are concerned, I would say it's over a 2:1 ratio -- so a bit more sausage on the sandwich, right? lol


As usual- I think your right CR-

I read a post from a mod/tech support guy who had quit a few months ago. He basically said in the 4 years he had been here, the ratio was climbing due to more men, the response rate for email had dropped to a third of what it originally was and the place was becoming polluted with fake profiles. As with many system that mankind sets up, people always work to try to find a way around them, game them to increase their odds and/ or corrupt them.

Another thing is the number of guys that will message girls and say really crappy things to them. This just puts them off being here and ruins the experience. Frankly it has no place on a dating site and serves no good. Some try to put it under the blanket of honesty- but its really just showing what angry shltheads they themselves are. Admin would do well to try harder to put a lid on it and may need to pay some one to check up on it and ban users. Sure the abusers could create new profiles, but enough times would shut them down. Then again- Admin may want us to pay to be here too. That would probably scare all the ladies off. LOL
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 122
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 6:45:52 PM
Surely this thread must be getting close to having a limit put on it, but considering it's almost the only active thread in this otherwise largely dead forum, hopefully they'll let it keep going, but if you don't hear from me again after this...

Divine: I'm telling you, I do not email women who disqualify me in their POF profiles (see one caveat below). Do you think I'm lying? Any man who does this, particularly in a large market and on any semi-regular basis, is a freakin' moron. Thousands upon thousands of women writing next-to-nothng in their profiles and you can at most email 1200 of them in a single month, and you choose to waste some of your 1200 emails on the 10% of women who preemptively told you to go take a hike? I wouldn't worry too much about what these guys are up to. They are learning to tie their shoes between tapping random keys at random profiles. My dear lady, you have done all you can, and I applaud you for it, though I believe you discredit the majority of men based on the actions of a relatively loud minority. I'd just find a tennis ball and email him myself.

Now strangely enough, I'm going to disagree with the man who disagreed with you disagreeing with me.

My female friends who are on this site actually meet/have met a good number of men. I wouldn't doubt all of them are meeting the same top 10% men over and over again, but I'm quite certain it's a fallacy that most women on here aren't interested in meeting ANY men. They just don't want to meet MOST men. 20/80, someone said? I wouldn't be surprised if it was 10/90.

WIP: As I've said before to you and I'll say again, your profile is usually QUITE adequate. You tell the freaks to stay away. Some don't because they're morons (see second paragraph), but you've done the best you could. I have no bone to pick with you. But you're highly unrepresentative of most women on this site. I can't speak for the 600:5 golf ball but this 2000:0 didn't email any women that said they wanted to play tennis, and I'm not sure why nobody believes me when I say that.

CR: Actually, I once suggested to Admin there SHOULD be a text section designated "My ideal date" or whatever, you know, like 99% of other sites, which would help people feel less self-conscious about stating such things if everybody had that option. Guess that would cut down on the site's "revenue model," though.

Mr. F: I like your style, man.

V95: My one fairly recent meeting through Match actually occurred with a woman whose requirements I matched in every way except I was a couple inches short on the height. But I didn't email her asking her for a date. To make a long story short, I seriously thought I knew somebody she knew, based on something she said in her descriptive area -- turns out she didn't know that woman, but she kept writing me anyway and we eventually met. However, that was a very unusual situation there and under normal circumstances I wouldn't email a woman who disqualified me by an inch or two no matter how perfect she seemed otherwise, despite the fact that that one particular instance kinda worked out -- the difference being, I wasn't really trying to make anything "work out." Kinda like when I occasionally email a woman on POF because of our forum interactions, though I obviously don't meet her qualifications for dating -- because I'm not emailing her about a date. That one time it turned into something like a "date" is meaningless -- generally speaking it's a bad idea and a waste of time to email a woman who disqualifies you in her profile.

"When men complain about this and then mention how the woman in question is getting 50 emails a day it is because they only email the most attractive women who can't even read all the emails they receive."

Again, another argument for bringing back the "no first contact emails in the past 24 hours" search. I hate to tell you women this, but most guys are not very good at figuring out which women are receiving 50 emails a day. We know what repulses us, and we know what a supermodel a milion miles outside of our league looks like. In between is a "gray area" the vast majority of women fall into. That's thousands of women! (On POF, in major metros.) What's the difference between a woman in the 40th percentile and a woman in the 60th percentile? I have no idea! That's why it was really nice when POF took the guesswork out of this madness and just TOLD us which women weren't receiving any first contact emails. Shockingly, most of those in that search were not dogs. Well, shocking to some of us men -- probably not shocking to you non-dog women who weren't getting very many first contact emails! The only more useful search on the site was "Not Viewed" which somehow also got buried (though buried alive in that case).

Instead of taking away that "no emails" search, POF should have expanded it so we could also see "less than 10 first contact emails in the past week" or something. Because I'd use the hell out of that thing -- the only reason I would KNOWINGLY send an email to a woman receiving 100 first contact emails a day is if she was the world's most perfect woman for me, in which case, why not waste a SINGLE email to that woman? But for the most part, I'd much rather send emails to women (who I find attractive) who might actually have time to read my emails, but I, like most men, have little idea who these women are. So, again, I have to email nearly all women (who don't disqualify me in their profiles and don't look like supermodels) to assure that I hit those that might give me a chance. Which is how you can end up with 2000 first contact emails in 3 years: by having no idea where you fit in in the dating world, and POF doing absolutely nothing to help you figure that out.

BTW, every time I check the Bay area's gender ratio on active profiles (that is, people who have been online over the past 24 hours), it pretty much is 1.5 to 1. Not sure why other areas would be all that different, isolated Alaskan lumberjacking towns excepted. But as I said in one of the gender ratio threads, women getting a massive number of emails is more a function of the total population of an area, not gender ratios. Even if women outnumbered men 5 to 1, the most popular women would still get hundreds of emails in an area with thousands of users. But in an area with 10 users where men outnumber women 5 to 1, the most first contact emails a woman would get is 10, until someone new moved in. And here I actually agree with jinx and WIP: so what if men vastly outnumber women if the vast majority of men are playing golf? Women might actually outnumber "tennis" men by a substantial amount. Sausage fest advantage: tennis men.
 DivineBovine
Joined: 5/13/2005
Msg: 123
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 8:22:52 PM

My dear lady, you have done all you can, and I applaud you for it, though I believe you discredit the majority of men based on the actions of a relatively loud minority.


my dear Hawking... after 5 plus years on this site and living in two different cities at the time, i can assure you that i do NOT discredit "the majority" of men based on the actions of the idiots.

but i am curious... do men get random emails like this:

Seriously...you sound like a total beyotch .... like...what ius atractive about u...

for i had not even LOOKED at this man's profile, much less sent him a message.

or this:

I'm a white male, but if you also like black guys and threesomes please write me back.

again, i had not looked at this man's profile, nor messaged him. and fortunately for me, he lives on the other side of Canada.

there is one man who is currently in my matches and under his previous profile, his fourth message to me was "can i lick you all over?" while none of the 3 previous messages gave... uh... rise to such a suggestion. he sent me an email under this profile that was deleted and blocked.

if someone like me dares to suggest that we are NOT attracted to these blatantly sexual come-ons, we are then treated to abusive emails along the lines of "stupid fat chick, you should be thanking me for the attention, what other man would even *offer*?"

i'm not discrediting the many based on this - i know there are good, kind, decent men out there (my sister is married to one) - but that loud "minority" is NOT a minority. from my perch up here on the cusp of my 50th birthday (which feels suspiciously like a spoiled "best before" date), those men are in the majority.

and i suspect that drivel like that is what comprises a LOT of the emails received by the young, beautiful 20% of women, too. which would go a LONG way to explain the 600 emails to get 5 dates!

the real miracle is that so many women stick around to try to find her needle in the haystack of male stupidity that is displayed by so many....
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 125
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 9:00:50 PM
^^^The deck is stacked the way it's stacked - realistically or based on each person's perception from their own experience. So now what? Men are free not to participate if they don't like the rules. Women aren't asking men to do anything - so much as they are going with their dating preferences (and in some cases requirements).

Look I know women recieve nasty emails. Problem is some of these guys would rather recieve an nasty email than none at all for 6 months!

Why is that? Men would rather be acknowledged (allegedly) for writing an e-mail than not responded to when either way the answer is no. Is that about ego? Attention? What? This site is a place to get a yes or no and move on, not a place for response etiquette. Who cares so long as you get your answer? Women tend not to want a response if it's a no, because it's a false hope situation - and something tells me that if instead of read-unread/deletes, if women responded to all e-mails then men would start complaining about how 90% of their e-mails returned are no's and how depressing it is to be told no most of the time. I still think anything but an enthusiastic yes will be a complaint.

Men are free to not play that game if they don't want to. I know myself and friends of mine will sit back and not play the game if we don't like the rules - and it's because we'd rather not date if it's not in our best interest. Men have that same option. Because men tend to compete with each other rather than support each other, they tend to feel that excluding themselves will only give other men an edge. Should that bother a guy who doesn't want to deal with the rat race? No. But for some reason it does.

WIP: As I've said before to you and I'll say again, your profile is usually QUITE adequate. You tell the freaks to stay away. Some don't because they're morons (see second paragraph), but you've done the best you could. I have no bone to pick with you. But you're highly unrepresentative of most women on this site. I can't speak for the 600:5 golf ball but this 2000:0 didn't email any women that said they wanted to play tennis, and I'm not sure why nobody believes me when I say that.

My point doesn't refer to men who have an unclear idea what a woman wants. My point is in reference to men who have the information and either choose to ignore it, or try to negotiate the information to get themselves considered. HOWEVER, why men bother to message women who have no information to go on is beyond me, since it's a crapshoot and likely won't pan out. I assume that it's because her picture is enticing, but who knows.
 Paddy_o_Lantern
Joined: 12/9/2009
Msg: 127
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 10:04:32 PM
Hey here's an idea, a paysite for guys, go there, post a profile, better screening, more mandatory questions, and a limit, if a woman does not go on 3 dates a month, and mandatory sending of 20 first contacts by women eery month,, you would undu she gets banned for 6 months the first time, 6 the second. Now the kicker would be the guys rate the woman on a date, if she fails 3 times, same bans go into affect. It would cost more for guys, th atraction to women, it would be cheaper, also the number of guys would undoubtedly be 4 or 5 to 1 men to women. Maybe a deal could be struk with Markus, Plenty of Real fish you undoubtedly would draw the best men, the sex guys wouldn't want that competition, and it would be attractive to real daters, not ego boosting seekers, email whores and dinner whores.


I know you must be kidding here as it is so obvious. Why do you think some chat sites and dating sites are less expensive for women than for men. Obvious answer is women are the main attraction and until men stop doing most of the chasing and women stop doing most of the picking things will not change. Some men will get aggressive because that's what happens to some people when they get competitive and/or frustrated. Some women will come off as being demanding but thats what happens when you have too many choices to choose from ( good bad or ugly ) or you get frustrated from catching the flack from the frustrated agressive or sexually inappropriate guys. Nobody said online dating was going to be a nice place to flaunt your shingle. As I said before its tough to stay here if you are the shrinking violet type.
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 129
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/13/2010 11:58:24 PM
Well, to be fair, the quotes like this pointed out...

Seriously...you sound like a total beyotch .... like...what ius atractive about u...

... doesn't go with the whole "you won't eliminate many golf-balls" sort of thing. It's a free site, you'll get crazy emails, sure. But OPTIONAL preferences and optional filter-blocks corresponding to each would end up solving the non-crazies who are golf-balls.

if a woman does not go on 3 dates a month, and mandatory sending of 20 first contacts by women eery month,, you would undu she gets banned for 6 months the first time, 6 the second. Now the kicker would be the guys rate the woman on a date, if she fails 3 times, same bans go into affect. It would cost more for guys, th atraction to women, it would be cheaper, also the number of guys would undoubtedly be 4 or 5 to 1 men to women. Maybe a deal could be struk with Markus, Plenty of Real fish you undoubtedly would draw the best men, the sex guys wouldn't want that competition, and it would be attractive to real daters, not ego boosting seekers, email whores and dinner whores.

Well, that'd be impossible, pretty much. First, in order to be remotely feasible, you'd have to force the users to mark each other as planning on going out on a date, then acknowledging that you did go out on one. Making women (who are not headed on a date) write 20 emails a month -- or about 1 different guy a day, 5 days a week on average, would be far too much... and even if they did play that game, you'd have fake interest across the board just to stay alive. I think it'd make it more crazy. They'd be getting tons of email AND have to send an initial one out every day on top of that (fake interest 95% of the time).

Also, if a lady gets a stream of emails, SHOULD there be some pressure for her to do initial emails? Why?

I don't think it's unfair that women don't do initial emails (for the most part), just because there's a gender unbalance in actions.

But there could be interesting things to eliminate what you point out about attention & dinner whores. Basically like marking someone for Spam -- but in that sense. I think in the case of email whoring, a guy could mark her as being in an email exchange with plans to meet.... and she can confirm that. If she gets a lot of markings of email exchange with plans to meet, but never confirms that, but the system still seeing she writes... or she does confirm that, but there never was a marking by the guy they went out on a date -- then she could be labeled as "possible email attention seeker".

You could go one step further for the "dinner digger"... heck, you could do a lot of key things people find, on both genders. The system can only play smart as far as emails go (exchanges occur in system)... but then warnings racked up by various guys toward a gal would "rate" her by the system. If women were warned about that, such types of gals go somewhere else. Also, when applied to other things for both genders both ways, like blatantly lying about themselves in their profile and whatnot -- then it'd force people to be real.

Instead of banning, they'd make it so you couldn't take off your profile and an embarrassing warning would be on there for some time to teach ya a lesson. :)
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 133
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/14/2010 4:25:09 PM

There are a number of women (and men) on these sites that lack the fortitude or whatever you want to call it to actually follow through and go beyond a few e-mails back and forth.

Um...would that be..."interest"?
 CoolBreezez
Joined: 8/20/2006
Msg: 134
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/14/2010 4:40:47 PM
Thanks OP- This thread is sort of along the same lines as other threads, but the perspectives are showing through rather than just a dismissive gender bash o rama. Since we lost the link from the dating side, it's slowed down posts on the forums but it seems to have lowered the angry troll level a few notches too. I found this thread more informative than usual.

The ladies, Jinx, WIP and DB have stuck with a bit, voiced the female side. I liked Jinxs last- numbers appeal to the analytical mans mind for description. And you know, for me its not unlike my experience here, with the numbers multiplied or the rate of mail increased. It also follows along with women's mail volumes are higher than guys. One day I hope to catch up to hers, but then that plan includes living to about... umm.....carry the two ...... 300. Of course I have an easy time identifying with the guys side.

I approach this much the same as Mr Evil, but send out a few here and there. Might be because of age- knowing that having a relationship is good but it has to be the right one After living through a few, and seeing some of the realities and work that comes along with it, I'm not looking for just a warm body and a pulse- talking , relating, getting along and enjoying each other do mean something.

Also a thought- in a way too much email seems to be a problem on here. Its free and practically unlimited. It leads to endless carpet bombing the market, unrealistic long shot taking,spam and malicious email. As humans tend to do, they waste and abuse a resource that appears limitless. This may seem counter intuitive, but the email needs a limiter to reduce this. If we had to pay for it (boo!) it would drop off greatly and people would use it with greater discretion.OK so keeping in the theme of this free site- the initial contact allowance needs to be dropped down dramatically ( sorry Hawking). I think the quality of use would improve.

But maybe going along with Hawks ideas, a template you can fill in too with requirements, likes and dislikes - maybe by degree - to help with the filtering and searching could be useful. Also a must read new users guidebook to get past the initial expectations and kind of a warning about the dark side..muhwahaha!

 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 135
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/14/2010 8:56:28 PM
"I' have better luck in getting responses from people who are completely new to online dating"

Indeed, the "new user" search is also quite helpful in balancing out emails on this site... which is why the admin will probably take it away soon. Not sure what he has against balancing out the number of emails sent around here, but as everybody always says, it's HIS site. The "new user" search actually isn't anywhere near as good as the others -- it doesn't do a very good job of filtering. I'm always getting women from Orlando when I use that thing -- that rarely ever happens with "not yet viewed" or "no emails."

"and i suspect that drivel like that is what comprises a LOT of the emails received by the young, beautiful 20% of women, too. which would go a LONG way to explain the 600 emails to get 5 dates!"

That explains why a woman might have to dig through 600 first contact emails to get 5 dates. Doesn't explain why a guy has to send 600 first contact emails to get 5 dates. Unless you're suggesting that women toss out the baby with the bath water. Which is never a good idea. I'm actually pretty sure they are a loud MINORITY. You're not getting dozens of emails from members of the majority because, much like you women, they are typically far more discriminating than the loud male minority, not to mention far more successful and often only need to send a few emails to get a relationship going and drop out of the POF business. Idiots have to send out hundreds of bad emails because they accomplish nothing with their first few. If someone wants to argue that male idiots send the majority of POF emails, then I will agree that's quite possible, but I refuse to believe that idiots make up the majority of males on this site.

"HOWEVER, why men bother to message women who have no information to go on is beyond me, since it's a crapshoot and likely won't pan out. I assume that it's because her picture is enticing, but who knows."

Yeah, that's pretty much right. In fact, I think a bunch of us guys already said as much in our previous posts!

But here's the other side of that, for me specifically: about that 10% or so of POF women who actually DO list a "clear" view of what they want -- I am clearly not what they want. I actually cannot respond to any profiles in which a woman clearly states what she wants, because she ALWAYS disqualifies me. I'm having great difficulty remembering a single exception to that. So I don't really have any choice but to contact "unclear" profiles. Which is a nice segue into my response to E Keys...

"you described the things I hated most about Match right away."

So if I do a reverse search on Match (the one that finds women who would be interested in dating someone like ME!), usually nearly all of results are from women who didn't bother to fill out ANY of the preferences. So either they were too lazy to fill out the preferences/not serious enough about the site (not a good sign, especially since it means they probably don't have a paid membership and I can't communicate with them, though try I might), they're scams/prostitutes/etc., or they REALLY don't have any preferences, in which case, something is very likely seriously wrong with them (mentally or physically). Most days I don't think much of it and just go about my business of trying to find a legitimate woman in the bunch, but some days I just find it quite sad that there is no such thing as a woman who is looking specifically for a man like me.

Oh, and, stay the hell away from Craig's List.

Evil/CR: That idea is just absurd. The best thing POF could do is 's double-blind matching function. That way women could express interest in men without any fear whatsoever of direct rejection, which would solve a lot of problems around here. It could even solve Jinx's problem indirectly, because two people would still find out they were interested in each other but the woman could still wait for the man to make the first move after this is revealed to both... and he'd get tripped up by the IE filter. I do, however, agree with you that it seemed like it was much easier to get women to meet you back in the early years of online dating, which is counterintuitive considering there were far less users, but apparently early adopters are less flaky.

"I don't get tons but i 1 or 2 a week. Sometimes when the moon is right i'll get 3 in a week" / "in my age range. I get emails as I said 2 or 3 times a month, sometimes a few more."

I call that "cooking with grease." I don't even get 3 VIEWS a week (unless I'm sending out tons of emails... I haven't sent out any since production started on my new movie a little over a week ago and I've had 4 views since (all by women with children, gah). I appear to be averaging about 1 first contact email every 3 months or so. According to my contact history, my last one from a non-forum dweller was in February.

Jinx: If your experience says the costs outweigh the benefits of sending first contact emails to men, who am I to argue with you? But surely you understand this site no longer has a "flirt" function. In real life, women can use non-verbal cues to get a man's attention. You can't really do anything on POF to get a man's attention, except maybe visit his profile in non-stealth mode. And I'd wager that you're one of the many women that only uses stealth mode, if you're that cautious about things like the IE issue. Therefore, you come across the profile of the PERFECT man FOR YOU... and then what? Nothing. Because he'll probably never see your profile -- well, if you lived in my area, he wouldn't, but you seem to be suggesting you have a much smaller metro, and if it's small enough, he'll probably eventually come across your profile. But not a chance in hell in my neck of the woods (or Mr. Evil's, as Atlanta is bigger than Tampa). I just don't see how a woman with that level of caution in my area would ever be able to connect with the kind of guy she wanted, particularly Mr. Perfecto, because there's absolutely no way to get his attention on POF other than to email him. I'm not sure missing out on THE ONE (considering how hard it is to find that needle in this huge haystack of an earth) is worth the cost.

Which is also, again, why I email every woman who doesn't disqualify me. Well, it's not so much a ONE thing, as just a DATE thing, because the amount of women who will date me is far less than 1%, and it's impossible for me to know who is in that <1% from the profiles women post on this site, and it's not worth the risk to skip over one for some random reason. The benefit of finding a woman in that <1% far outweighs the cost... I think. I might have a different opinion in another 3 years. Heck, arguably, I'm following your rule: I shouldn't just automatically assume certain women are out of my league. So I can't assume any of them are. Except for, say, Megan Fox and friends. And not a girl that looks like Megan Fox -- the ACTUAL Megan Fox. Megan Fox is out of my league for reasons beyond mere looks.
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 136
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/14/2010 9:07:48 PM

So I don't really have any choice but to contact "unclear" profiles.

There's that language again - that..."I have no choice" stuff...you most certainly do have a choice. You are choosing to send messages. You can choose not to send messages to those profiles...but yeah yeah I know the dating pool gets smaller - the answer to everything. You'll get less/no dates. Can't have that.
 platypus_man
Joined: 8/29/2007
Msg: 137
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/15/2010 2:17:37 AM
5 for 600? I'll take that. It'd be an improvement. For some of us, even the remote chance is enough to keep us in the online dating world. I'm dealing with a >99% guaranteed failure rate (because I'm a crossdresser) before we even start to get to know each other. At least online, I can be up front with people so I don't have to keep dealing with the constant rejection.
 canoga77
Joined: 5/25/2008
Msg: 138
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/15/2010 3:49:46 AM
Plain and simple, I don't write first messages here because I'm currently choosing, in line with this site's functions, to not circumvent my own "no Intimate Encounter, etc" mail settings.
Why? I decided, given the current functions of the site and my experiences having tried it, that for me (and I'd venture to guess many women), sending first messages fails the cost-benefit analysis with this site when it comes to avoiding the men who are strictly seeking sex.. [Passing a cost-benefit analysis = plusses outweigh the minuses, benefits outweigh the costs.]

This make absolutely no sense. If you think most men on this site are only looking for sex, then you should be searching for and contacting men who are not. Most of the players on this site are not going to be honest about what they want anyway and will be hitting on every woman until they finally get what they want.

You should be pro-active and trying to find men who are interesting, attractive, and at least appear to sincerely want a relationship. What is the cost of sending out a few messages? For crying out loud, this is a free site! Every woman here has an excuse as to why she doesn't want to make first contact and would rather just passively sit back and wait for the right man to contact her. Most of these excuses are quite poor, in my opinion.
 Paddy_o_Lantern
Joined: 12/9/2009
Msg: 140
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/15/2010 7:19:13 AM

It makes perfect sense to exploit the system's capabilities to one's own advantage.


I have to question the systems capabilities at least where I live anyway .I find the searches by distance from my postal code don't yield accurate results so I question the effectiveness of other limiters. I have had limiters on smokers and a distance limiter of 75 miles and had the odd initial contact from women who smoke and women who live 250 miles away. Maybe these limiters don't work for initial contacts from women to men because the site feels men aren't getting enough initial contacts to worry about.
 ForRumOnly
Joined: 3/16/2009
Msg: 141
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/15/2010 7:53:33 AM
There are many strategies to get dates. Sounds like the person described used the shotgun approach. At the other extreme is the sniper approach. I used another method entirely - I was the quarry, not the hunter, and presented myself as an attractive catch. As such, I let women contact me, and that worked very well. Why? Because they found ME interesting, and had sufficient self-esteem and assertiveness to go after what they wanted. That also seemed to correlate well with a healthy libido! LOL I'd tried the narrowly targeted approach of contacting carefully selected women, and that rarely worked, for whatever reason - hence the method that I eventually adopted that did work.
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 142
view profile
History
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/15/2010 8:07:46 AM
WIP: You do realize you're in an extreme minority, right? The vast majority of people on this planet don't care for being alone. If they did, the human race wouldn't last for much longer -- it is an evolutionary internal drive that keeps the species going. Look, I respect your right not to give a damn about whether you ever have another date -- why don't you respect my right to give a damn about whether I ever have another date? You're an attractive woman who has never had a problem getting dates. So your attitude toward this situation is completely understandable. It's like Barry Bonds not giving a damn if he ever hits another homerun. I've grown up in a completely different set of circumstances (unattractive male who has always had problems getting dates), so it should not shock you to learn that I have a completely different attitude toward dating than you do. You badgering me about my desire to have a fulfilling dating life probably isn't going to change that. And unless you go back and re-live your life in the same manner I have, I doubt you're ever going to understand my attitude about it. But even taking the peculiarity of my particular situation out of the equation, you are still outside the norm and I'm not quite sure how you don't see that. Most people (especially men, ESPECIALLY unattractive men) realize they have to actively work at dating, or it's pretty likely dating won't happen. Obviously, many attractive women (and some men) don't have to put any effort into it and things will still happen for them (not necessarily good things), but I don't see the point in continuously rubbing my nose in your good fortune. Feel free to enjoy your alone status; I see no reason to enjoy mine just because you enjoy yours.

On this IE filter, jinx: Any depraved character worth his salt would have enough sense to continuously delete and restart his profile every time he got IE-tagged, so I wouldn't be so sure a guy is "safe" just because he can message you. There is no POF-main-site advantage to having been a long-time member. In the forums, it's kind of cool that I have "Joined 4/16/07" next to my picture, so all you newbies can see that I'm an elder statesman up in this joint (though that's highly misleading since I didn't make a single post prior to last fall!), but at POF main, I might as well have joined this morning as far as the women I'm emailing are concerned.

But I didn't realize you don't search or look at men's profiles un-prompted, so, yeah, I guess you won't ever come across (and miss out on) your perfect man that way, although you're still decreasing your chances by almost half of connecting with the perfect guy (you are far from alone on that, of course, since most women don't message and a large percentage also search in stealth mode). Seems a little overly cautious strategy to ME, but if that's how you choose to use this site, as you say, it's your business (I actually tend to doubt very many non-forum women employ this strategy -- you pretty much would have to read some posts about it to even realize such a strategy exists, as it's not explicitly stated at the main site). Again, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of guys on here are good guys who are shouted down by a very vocal minority. If there were as many terrible men in the world as there APPEAR to be on this site, there would be anarchy in the streets.

"shotgun" method: It is theoretically almost impossible for this NOT to work in the long term. Let's say you have a population of 1000 women, and 10 of them will go out with you. If you email all 1000 of them, you will have 10 dates, will you not? They might be the last 10 you email, but nevertheless, the shotgun method worked, in the long term. The "sniper" method assumes you can actually figure out who those 10 women are. Hell, we all think we're snipers in the beginning. Most of us are freakin' wrong most of the time -- we end up shooting a bunch of women with kevlar vests. So some quit the game, some become shotgun guys. I don't consider "quarry" to be a separate category from either of those -- you can certainly wait for the women to email you while you're also emailing them. If you go "straight quarry," I suppose it's less stressful, but generally much more disappointing, because of the jinxes of the world (that is, she never emails guys and believes many other women don't for the same reason -- certainly many women don't for SOME reason). If you've been successful at "straight quarry," more power to you, but that never works for a guy who's in the bottom 1% of desirable searchable traits. Probably does work out for a top 50%-er.
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 143
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/15/2010 10:54:02 AM
WIP: You do realize you're in an extreme minority, right? The vast majority of people on this planet don't care for being alone. If they did, the human race wouldn't last for much longer -- it is an evolutionary internal drive that keeps the species going.

1. I don't care for being alone either, well not constantly anyway - but single to me doesn't = "alone". It means single, something most of us are a decent amount of time in life and SHOULD make peace with. I may not be dating but I am not alone because there are still people around most of the time.

2. I may be in the extreme minority on the dating end of this site, because people looking for dates come here, but I can't say the vast majority out there want any specific thing, since I don't personally know most of the universe. However I do know that if you don't like being single, you're more apt to believe most people don't like it either - because it makes you feel better. The bottom line is that you don't like it. And that's fine - but feeling you have a gun to your head to look for a date isn't necessary even for those who aren't comfortable with single. The more comfortable you are, the more relaxed you are about dating and the more attractive you are to potential mates.

Look, I respect your right not to give a damn about whether you ever have another date -- why don't you respect my right to give a damn about whether I ever have another date?

This isn't about me, or what I give a damn about - it's about the mindset of a typical dater. It's possible to create the opposite of what you'd like based on your mindset. The idea that you have to do anything isn't accurate. You may want to, you may feel it's something that will get you what you want, but you don't "have" to do anything. And that wasn't just about you - I see it a lot, and sensing it CAN cause people to avoid a person.

You're an attractive woman who has never had a problem getting dates. So your attitude toward this situation is completely understandable. It's like Barry Bonds not giving a damn if he ever hits another homerun.

I get real tired of people thinking what I look like (in their eyes, BTW - many people don't find me attractive, just like most of us) has ANYTHING to do with my mindset. It's also really arrogant to assume you're the only one to ever have it tough - not to mention a form of narcissism. If you think I was the prom queen you're sadly mistaken - many of us weren't. And those who were didn't usually have much to do with how they got there.

I've grown up in a completely different set of circumstances (unattractive male who has always had problems getting dates), so it should not shock you to learn that I have a completely different attitude toward dating than you do. You badgering me about my desire to have a fulfilling dating life probably isn't going to change that. And unless you go back and re-live your life in the same manner I have, I doubt you're ever going to understand my attitude about it. But even taking the peculiarity of my particular situation out of the equation, you are still outside the norm and I'm not quite sure how you don't see that. Most people (especially men, ESPECIALLY unattractive men) realize they have to actively work at dating, or it's pretty likely dating won't happen. Obviously, many attractive women (and some men) don't have to put any effort into it and things will still happen for them (not necessarily good things), but I don't see the point in continuously rubbing my nose in your good fortune. Feel free to enjoy your alone status; I see no reason to enjoy mine just because you enjoy yours.

Wow, that was a rant.

Look, we all have good fortune, depending on how we want to see it. I'm healthy, have good friends, and enjoy my life - ALL ELSE to me is a bonus. I don't think having a date validates me, never did. If I don't date, I don't worry about it - if someone doesn't like me, I don't take it personally...and I'm NO DIFFERENT FROM anyone else - about 80% of the guys I like don't like me back. Rather than see it as a failure though I realize it's typical odds. I also know that those who are interested in me isn't personal to me either, it's usually about me being female and breathing. I don't take credit for that, I had nothing to do with it. For everyone that thinks I am attractive and can't see why I would have a problem (which again, has nothing to do with anything I did) there are at least 2 that either think I am not attractive or don't notice me either way. That's life - and perhaps it's my firm grasp on reality that gives me the attitude I have.

At the end of the day who wants to date me and who doesn't just isn't huge on my list of things to worry about - when work, improving myself, enjoying life and friends and staying healthy are a much greater priority. My mom chased men around when I was a kid...she made men WAY more important than they had to be and many times her life and kids came second - and in the end her priorities and her choices in men got her nowhere. It was humiliating to watch and would be tragic to repeat.

Mostly I don't think the world revolves around me (I learned real young that it doesn't - a valuable lesson for a kid), which greatly cuts down on my drama level and stress...I'm sure that makes me happier because I don't wonder what I'm owed or bitch about why I got shafted or complain about why others have what I don't. If I do bump into something or someone that's positive in my life I appreciate it and enjoy it. If it doesn't last I'm glad I got to experience it. If I'm happy with what I have I can never worry about what I'm missing. I apologize that you feel any of that is personal to you.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 144
600 emails to get 5 dates???
Posted: 6/15/2010 12:42:06 PM
My PoF settings block:
-men who write to "intimate encounter" seekers
-men who write messages that indicate they are seeking sex

No, those setting block people who (1) voluntarily list themselves as seeking an intimate encounter; and (2) people who have initiated contact with 4 or more people who have voluntarily listed themselves as looking for intimate encounters or other relationship (or women who have initiated contact with 8 or more people looking for intimate encounters or other relationship) AND have not deleted their profiles and started over. The I.E. filter has no way of knowing whether someone has written a message seeking sex. It's only purpose is pr that appeals to women by giving them a false sense of security by using the misleading wording that describes its function. In particular, it doesn't have any effect on people who write to intimate encounter seekers if the intimate encounter seeker initiated contact.

If I write a first message to those men, I have unwittingly overridden my own mail settings.

In the first case, you are warned by the fact that the person's profile has ``Looking for an Intimate Encounter. '' In the seccond case, you should think of it as sending messages to an account because men can always create another account.

Regardless, this was yet another example of a man telling a woman/women what they should do, as if he knows better than we do.

I'm mainly just amazed that people rely on the IE filter to do what it purports to do. It's impossible to tie a person to an account name or figure out a person's intent in sending a message by using a computer program to parse the message and feed it to an algorithm.


Most people (especially men, ESPECIALLY unattractive men) realize they have to actively work at dating, or it's pretty likely dating won't happen. Obviously, many attractive women (and some men) don't have to put any effort into it and things will still happen for them (not necessarily good things), but I don't see the point in continuously rubbing my nose in your good fortune. Feel free to enjoy your alone status; I see no reason to enjoy mine just because you enjoy yours.

I don't see anyone enjoying his or her status so much as try to point out that a negative attitude can only make whatever status anyone (e,g., you) has worse.
Show ALL Forums  > Dating Experiences  >