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  > Plentyoffish Site/Suggestions/Help  > What's with this new relationship history question?      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 BuzWeaver
Joined: 7/7/2007
Msg: 25
What's with this new relationship history question?Page 5 of 8    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)
The question is misleading, because as I recall the question was "The longest relationship you've been in." I took this as 'how long was your longest relationship". Upon re-reading this its says: The longest relationship BuzWeaver has been in was over 2 years long.

Shouldn't the question have been "How long ago was your last relationship?" I've not found any way to edit this. My last relationship and or the length of one my relationship(s) are two different things.
 JaxFlorida
Joined: 11/27/2007
Msg: 26
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/10/2010 3:31:07 PM
Don't know if I want to close the account but agree questions are getting too personal. Especially when answers show up on profile pages.

Obviously Big Fish (whoever they are) is paying attention to the site or changes would not be happening.

Wonder who is suggesting to Big Fish to make changes like this.? Of course nobody will know.

Sorry folks but I find it hard to believe 1 man (or person) knows enough about programming enough to make changes by "their self." There has to be a team or others we don't know about.

Lots of things involved in running a site. Advertising, design, changes etc.. Don't believe 1 person is running the show..
 JaxFlorida
Joined: 11/27/2007
Msg: 27
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/10/2010 4:06:43 PM
Sorry folks no matter what we say or our opinions are Things Will Not Matter!.

As users of the site we have had opinions, objectives, how much we don't like things. etc..

Even if the majority says they don't like things Nothing Will Change!

There are No votes going on here. Things get changed whether we like them or not.

I don't like some changes either but guess we deal with them or go somewhere else.
 raxarsr
Joined: 7/10/2008
Msg: 28
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/11/2010 5:52:15 AM
one has to ask.........where is bigfish in this,,,,,,and other questions.........ie.......the size of the forum pages........loss of link to the forums

i like this site......and i understand he needs to make money.........and that the bandwidth of the forums is proubly the biggest expense..................just seems hes doing more to drive folks away than to attract them
 Ed Bear
Joined: 5/19/2007
Msg: 29
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/11/2010 10:57:05 AM
First of all, I can't believe the users who seem to think that the phrase appearing on our profiles means our last relationship in any way, or how long since our last relationship. Both the question and the display clearly mean "how long was the longest relationship you have ever had?" (They don't say anything about what sort of relationship or if it's with a person, though.)

More importantly - no, it's not the only thing to judge a person by. Dating sites and services and even your pal who knows a chick he thinks you might dig all ask assorted questions and provide them for assessment. Our profiles are full of questions.

Why are some second-guessed, as with "seeking" and "Intent?" Who knows. Why are some given their own section in the profile display rather than being listed along with others? Who knows. Why are some compulsory? One would hope most things would be things people choose to reveal - though "prefer not to say" usually makes people think the worst.

So I'm not upset about most of the questions - the methods of compulsion are annoying, though, and requiring income is way over the top. My profile's still frozen.
ED BEAR
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 30
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/11/2010 11:55:45 AM

But, the way this site now lists relationship length on profiles, the site is actually implying to people that there is something wrong with anyone who hasn't had a relationship of a certain duration.

Or if it's been too long. In an online environment, people are in checklist-assume-the-worst mode. Think about it, either way.

- Say you're someone at least well into their 20s who's never been married ("Single", not divorced), and your relationship length was 5+ years. People are going to think - why didn't you get married? Do you like being with people you're not a match for? You like dragging out "ehh" relationships -- why not just cut it off after a year or two if it's not going great? Or do you just hate marriage?

- Say you're someone around 30 or higher, and your answer is 2 or less. WTF? You're scared of commitment?

Additionally, Markus should make the site where private information isn't shown to non-sign-up members. Like someone said, it is an advertising site, first and foremost... but private information is FINE to factor into formulas to only display "your top matches" listed or something. I'm all for that, even though I take such results with a grain of salt.

But to post it up there for just about anyone to see -- no. Heck, one's "intent" is a bit too much... or even a profile altogether. There should be an option to hide one's profile from non-members.

Personally, I think it only fuels the whole "profile fibbing" thing, and causes more harm than good in the end. He needs to change the question... or make it like income, where you can only know indirectly via searches.
 TheGoob
Joined: 5/21/2010
Msg: 31
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/11/2010 3:38:48 PM
Here's a problem, what if I've never been with anyone? Sure there's the "under 1 year" option, but that's just not honest with me...
 Padawan61
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 32
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/11/2010 9:22:04 PM
What's next? Sexual history? Maybe we can send current STD tests, have them scanned and added to our profiles. That should just about cover things at this point

That's coming up as the next profile requirement. Along with favorite sexual positions/acts.

What's next? Are you a virgin?


Please don't give him any new ideas...

No ... it will be more specific than "Are you a virgin?". It's that ... plus when and where. i.e. age and place of the occurence.
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 33
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/12/2010 3:04:09 PM

It's a stupid question because it just isnt as black & white as numbers

What gets me is that it's not used for some hidden formula in the background to do a statistical probability analysis for 'best matches' or something, by whatever school of thought Markus may choose to utilize -- who really cares much when it comes to that.

The real problem is that it's right out there -- on an individual, and in the online atmosphere of "erring on the side of negative interpretation", individual viewers will take it in many different ways.

I can see formerly divorced... currently separated... okay. Even single (not married). Fine, that's a broad stroke, and some people have their deal-breakers about one having kids or not... or at a certain age, never being married or not, or even more uncommon when older, divorced or not.

But this gets down to a vague-and-specific combo. It says nothing about when that was, or how often -- it's directly implying there's something to it, and lets one's imagination run free if it's not standard for an age group -- or wonder why (again, neg interpretation).

Ex: I'm 45, my longest relationship was 7 yrs, and that happened from junior high - mid college. Since then, I've dated many women, but none have lasted more than 3-4 weeks.

Ex: I'm 45, my longest relationship was 7 yrs. I've had a marriage that lasted 7 years, an LTR that lasted 7yrs, one that lasted 3yrs, and one that lasted about a year.

Ex: I'm 45, my longest relationship was 7 yrs, and all the others, *10*, were relationships lasting 1-2 years, and another *25* lasting 3-4 months.

They I could see "when did your last relationship end?" as a changeable entity, with maybe a level of importance ("not serious", "standard", "serious"). At least that would be better... at least you'd know if someone was on the rebound or not.
 danjude2
Joined: 7/13/2009
Msg: 34
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/13/2010 5:56:44 AM
I received a similar answer to an earlier person from this website. The question is ridiculous. No other website asks such a question. I suggest we all send messages to them until they realize how ridiculous this is
 danjude2
Joined: 7/13/2009
Msg: 36
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/14/2010 12:07:11 PM
I was messaging a girl. The minute I was forced to answer this question, I haven't heard from her since. Coincidence? Awfully big one.
 Padawan61
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 37
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/15/2010 9:37:56 PM
Not everyone is on here all the time which would explain why you don't see it on every profile

If you mean being on the forums here, then no. But if someone hasn't logged into their profile in months ... chances are they wouldn't even know about the new requirement.

were profiles with different relationship wants not have to answer? ex...hang out?

No ... the question is there for us "Hang Out" types too. However, we simply chose not to answer ... and didn't answer the "Intent" question either. Since I don't get many emails ... not answering has little consequence for me. One POF member did message me ... whom I had corresponded with before. I could not read their mail ... but was able to send them my off-site email address.

Did some people just get lucky and are able to bypass this question in order to still answer mail?

There was a workaround until recently ... where you could still read (and reply) to mail through "View All Messages" for a particular username. Admin has since closed that door.
 daffie
Joined: 5/21/2010
Msg: 38
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/16/2010 8:51:02 PM
it's a totally irrelevant question and quite laughable to think any that any information
coerced from people can be taken as truth...

there are so many variables as to why a relationship has lasted or not, as well as the duration of that relationship...
i know a man who kept a mistress for 25 years, his longest relationship...
where does he slot in?...
 Kelso
Joined: 3/11/2007
Msg: 39
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/17/2010 9:59:41 AM

They need to say everything they want to say in the subject line, because that's all I can see...lol.
I wonder how many characters the subject line holds?
This is where "text speak," that so many of us detest, will come in handy.
 brent174
Joined: 3/11/2007
Msg: 40
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 7/18/2010 11:11:09 AM
This is yet another question that is useless to me. For all the reasons that have been listed in this thread by various contributors, and probably many more no one has mentioned, a simple number does not convey meaningful information. There are too many reasons why a terrible relationship could drag on far longer than it should, and there are too many reasons why a great relationship could be cut short. Whether a large or small one, the number of years alone says NOTHING.

If there are certain (reasonable) pieces of information that are needful for marketing and sales, and we have to face facts, that is how the site is paid for and how Big Fish earns his living, then collect them, but there is no reason to clutter up our profiles with them.
 Mirlaine
Joined: 6/20/2007
Msg: 41
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 8/10/2010 8:20:57 PM
I have nothing to add that hasn't already been said on this issue, but if nothing else, would like to be counted among those who are REALLY TURNED OFF by this mandatory questions, and it turns me off to see it on others' profiles, too. Admin...are you listening??
 parrotmama
Joined: 10/4/2009
Msg: 42
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 10/14/2010 7:58:39 PM
I've read all the responses and I guess I'm the skunk at the teaparty here. I don't mind the question and I think it could be useful in weeding out people who don't do well in LTRs. I just looked at an interesting profile but the man was in his 50s and his longest relationship was only 4 years...that would raise a concern for me. Does he chronically make bad choices in partners? Is he unable to sustain interest once the "new" wears off? Is he a serial dater only interested in putting notches in his bedpost? I do think that the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. If someone has lived half a century without ever having a long term relationship, chances are that won't happen in the future either. I realize that people do change, sometimes, with lots of effort or some kind of life changing epiphany but what I have observed is that most folks just get more set in their ways...OK, I'll duck now...
 MrScuba
Joined: 3/25/2007
Msg: 43
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 10/14/2010 10:48:06 PM
OK Mr. Moderator,

You have a good system here, but making us answer these questions is intrusive.

The whole idea of forcing us to specify answers to poorly constructed questions with a limited set of answers is frankly intrusive and misleading. For instance: Q: "Will you date smokers?" A1= Yes, A2= No, A3=will not date non-smokers (or however that was worded). HOW ABOUT A4="IT DEPENDS". Life is not black and white. There are always exceptions. Better yet, DON't MAKE THESE QUESTIONS MANDATORY.

And what about information about our parents, the number of kids in our family, THAT is really none of anyone's business unless we decide to volunteer those details to those that we communicate with. Yes I know that those questions are not YET compulsory to answer, but the way things are going here, it would not surprise me.

Yes we are lucky to have this wonderful system that costs us nothing (except advertising), but some people are shy, or just don't think you need to know all those juicy details, and you have no moral right to be demanding this information from us.

Thanks!
 richbloke
Joined: 12/12/2008
Msg: 44
view profile
History
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 10/28/2010 2:34:08 PM
I'm another who absolutely resents it being mandatory to answer this intrusive question. It simply means people will jump to conclusions without knowing someone's full story. Hence I have no intention of answering the question honestly.
 KDizzleDazzle
Joined: 8/22/2010
Msg: 45
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 10/28/2010 4:03:22 PM
And people who deliberatelyy lie because it's inconvenient for them to tell the truth are exactly why internet dating is so difficult...
 Unguided Tourist
Joined: 12/22/2008
Msg: 46
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 10/31/2011 10:05:29 AM
There are categories on here such "do you have children", "do you have a car" that have the option of "prefer not to say" which leaves it open-ended but we get forced to answer about our past relationships. I find that odd, either add a "prefer not to say" option or force the other categories with more direct options.
 Unguided Tourist
Joined: 12/22/2008
Msg: 47
What's with this new relationship history question?
Posted: 10/31/2011 11:02:33 AM
Robotx,

I agree with your comments, someone's past should not be up for a blanket judgement on a dating site. It takes away from interacting and discussing these sorts of things through emails or personal conversations. Sometimes too much info is not a good thing.
Show ALL Forums  > Plentyoffish Site/Suggestions/Help  > What's with this new relationship history question?