How does OKC compare to PoF? I get no responses on the latter, regardless of what I say. I don't bite, people, you can respond!
Unless you are one of the very, very few men in this thread lucky enough to be considerably more attractive to women than the average, you should still expect a response rate of between 1 in 10 to 1 in 50 (or more) to an initial message even on OKC. Not all those responses will be positive either.
That's part of why we commiserate in this thread much of the time. The first blast of feeling like you're the ugliest, most uninteresting, and most socially obtuse person on earth after the initial enthusiasm wears off can be intense. Online dating has its highs and lows just like any other method of dating.
DaimarA Million Feet Tall of AwesomeRegistered Userregular
You may need better pictures or you need to lie more...possibly both.
+3
Options
NocrenLt Futz, Back in ActionNorth CarolinaRegistered Userregular
So me and capoera girl are exchanging long emails which is nice. Lots of information going back and forth. Weather, games, family, food, hiking trails, and generally lots of stuff.
It's something to look forward to since I get one about once a day/evening.
A response rate of 1 in 10 would be amazing and a huge success. I get about 1 in 100. Send ten messages a day, one response every 10 days.
I don't count responses from people who are clearly bored or abusive or self-obsessed time wasters. But one good, promising message out of 100. Of those, maybe one in four turns into a date.
I'm going to get a decent photo and give Tinder a try. It takes a good hour to send ten messages and with such a low return it's not really worth it. Swiping seems significantly more efficient.
A response rate of 1 in 10 would be amazing and a huge success. I get about 1 in 100. Send ten messages a day, one response every 10 days.
I don't count responses from people who are clearly bored or abusive or self-obsessed time wasters. But one good, promising message out of 100. Of those, maybe one in four turns into a date.
I'm going to get a decent photo and give Tinder a try. It takes a good hour to send ten messages and with such a low return it's not really worth it. Swiping seems significantly more efficient.
I can say that Tinder is indeed a much more efficient way of being unresponded to compared to OKC.
I think I finally have enough self confidence to realize that I can easily go out and find meaningless, random sex.
And sometimes I might not even have to pay for it!
But I don't want meaningless sex.
Amen.
Nothing new on my front which I guess is good news. I think the potential storm as been avoided by my last message and thing's will cool off for now. Plan is to contact her again once we near the time of departure (like a week before or so).
A response rate of 1 in 10 would be amazing and a huge success. I get about 1 in 100. Send ten messages a day, one response every 10 days.
I don't count responses from people who are clearly bored or abusive or self-obsessed time wasters. But one good, promising message out of 100. Of those, maybe one in four turns into a date.
I'm going to get a decent photo and give Tinder a try. It takes a good hour to send ten messages and with such a low return it's not really worth it. Swiping seems significantly more efficient.
I can say that Tinder is indeed a much more efficient way of being unresponded to compared to OKC.
My experience on Tinder says I don't have to worry about not being responded to because I don't match with anyone. Except the predictable bot with hot girl pictures and some generic inspirational saying.
Even though it seems OKC and PoF have the same people I like OKC more because it did not ask questions about income that was going to help make your match
F that
Really I liked having a social life when I dated now I look at it as do I really want to in this state?
I'm going to go out with this not so attractive woman again. Go to a museum or something. Been texting her ocassionally or she texts me. How bad can it be?
I'm going to try to make this work because I'm sick of internet dating. Also, this woman pays twice as much rent as I do which implies twice as much income. And an unattractive woman appreciates you more. I don't want to get into a Jimmy Soul tangent, though.
But how many unattractive women (and men) are out there? Loads. I see them all the time. What are they doing? Are they all getting cats? No, most of them are in relationships.
Not to be presumptuous but...does that mean you're very attractive? It's kind of messed up to say that you seem to be thinking you're on this platform above her.
Also...does that mean only ugly people get into relationships to settle? As a pretty goddamn ugly guy, I've dated plenty of attractive women (and had relationships with them), and been told that they weren't in fact settling. In a strange turn one of them, I dumped one for not being interesting enough/being unattractive (pretty as a flower, but shallow as a puddle).
So when you say unattractive, are you talking about just looks? Or does she punch babies? Because if she punches babies, I'd say that she's pretty unattractive. Otherwise she just isn't pretty to you and deserves more than pity dating.
1) I have met Kupo and he's not ugly.
2) I met some girl on Coffee Meets Bagel and it's been going really well for the last month or so. So that's good! Each time we've hung out, it's been for 3++ hours.
Hope all you people are doing well. To the person considering dating someone he doesn't find attractive - just don't. This girl isn't a tool to build your self esteem.
The only kind of dating I've ever done is "internet dating" lol. It's hard to meet people any other way because I'm really introverted and shy (at least, initially).
I met my boyfriend on a forum about 3 years ago. Never had any success with dating sites though. Got a lot of messages from guys who had absolutely nothing in common with me...
Shared interests are great, but in my experience they don't adequately predict or determine compatibility. Personally, I'd rather have an intelligent, assertive, and kind woman over one who simply shares my nerdy interests. An overlap of those are preferred, yet focusing on interests has led me into some bad relationships. The way I look at it, an intelligent woman is guranteed to have interests in common with me anyway. Not playing games with her doesn't seem so bad in the long run if we get along. Too many of my friends look for geeky women specifically and it's a mistake.
Shared interests are great, but in my experience they don't adequately predict or determine compatibility.
Yeah, I agree with that. It's just one thing among others that is important to me. I guess I can be kind of picky about personality (definitely moreso than looks, for example). Intelligence and kindness are always expected as well. :P
I believe I have experienced a blessing in disguise.
That last reply I sent to the girl? Well, it actually never made it, so she hadn't heard from me since Wednesday. We both got a message today saying that my message didn't arrive, and so we began our contact anew. I guess the wait time was a good thing because she was really forthcoming, and interested in doing some of the stuff I had planned for the trip. So yay for that
I believe I have experienced a blessing in disguise.
That last reply I sent to the girl? Well, it actually never made it, so she hadn't heard from me since Wednesday. We both got a message today saying that my message didn't arrive, and so we began our contact anew. I guess the wait time was a good thing because she was really forthcoming, and interested in doing some of the stuff I had planned for the trip. So yay for that
Shared interests are less a matter of looking for something, and more a mechanism for interacting with anybody in the first place.
I disagree. Someone's interests say much about their character. Interaction is also the basis of any relationship.
Shared interests are extremely important. I just don't think any subset should be prioritized over personality traits.
Yeah - a lack of shared interests is evidence of dissimilar worldviews. Which, in my experience, is big trouble. Of course, overly shared interests can be just as problematic.
Shared interests are less a matter of looking for something, and more a mechanism for interacting with anybody in the first place.
I disagree. Someone's interests say much about their character. Interaction is also the basis of any relationship.
Shared interests are extremely important. I just don't think any subset should be prioritized over personality traits.
Yeah - a lack of shared interests is evidence of dissimilar worldviews. Which, in my experience, is big trouble. Of course, overly shared interests can be just as problematic.
I politely disagree with this. It isn't so much dissimilar worldview as dissimilar experience. My gf is a huge workaholic, not because she is averse to fun, but because she was raised as a psychotic workaholic. That being said, I've slowly been introducing things to her, and while she isn't a rampant whovian, we both agree that Frank Underwood is an evil evil, inspiring man. But this all came from the difference of interests than anything else. Your partner should be complimentary, because lord knows if I was dating myself, I'd commit suicide.
Shared interests are less a matter of looking for something, and more a mechanism for interacting with anybody in the first place.
I disagree. Someone's interests say much about their character.
I dunno, I never felt this to be the case. Of course I rarely interact with people with whom I share no interests whatsoever. And of course it depends on what we mean by "interests". I have an interest in not getting up at 6 on a weekend to go hiking and I wouldn't be compatible with a girl who didn't share that interest, but I get the feeling that not everyone means "interests" in such a broad way.
I think a lot of guys, and particularly nerds, mean by shared "interests" shared hobbies.
Shared interests are less a matter of looking for something, and more a mechanism for interacting with anybody in the first place.
I disagree. Someone's interests say much about their character. Interaction is also the basis of any relationship.
Shared interests are extremely important. I just don't think any subset should be prioritized over personality traits.
Yeah - a lack of shared interests is evidence of dissimilar worldviews. Which, in my experience, is big trouble. Of course, overly shared interests can be just as problematic.
I politely disagree with this. It isn't so much dissimilar worldview as dissimilar experience. My gf is a huge workaholic, not because she is averse to fun, but because she was raised as a psychotic workaholic. That being said, I've slowly been introducing things to her, and while she isn't a rampant whovian, we both agree that Frank Underwood is an evil evil, inspiring man. But this all came from the difference of interests than anything else. Your partner should be complimentary, because lord knows if I was dating myself, I'd commit suicide.
It's not all or nothing.
If someone likes nothing but reality shows, soap operas, and judge Judy then we're not going to get along. I don't care how smart you are (but those shows are really shallow anyway so maybe they're poor examples). Same goes with Fox News and other sorts of entertainment indicative of right wing views. If you like horror movies then you like to be scared. If you like mysteries then you like to think. If you like documentaries then you like to learn. Every form of entertainment makes statements that must be accepted on some level to be enjoyed. That speaks to your character. Plus some shared activities both of you enjoy are necessary for a healthy long term relationship.
Edit: so no, not necessarily hobbies. Science and philosophy also fit the bill
Taranis on
+1
Options
JuliusCaptain of Serenityon my shipRegistered Userregular
If you like horror movies then you like to be scared. If you like mysteries then you like to think. If you like documentaries then you like to learn.
One can also all like those things without liking movies. I agree that what a person likes tells you something about that person, but a lack of liking something doesn't.
If you like horror movies then you like to be scared. If you like mysteries then you like to think. If you like documentaries then you like to learn.
One can also all like those things without liking movies. I agree that what a person likes tells you something about that person, but a lack of liking something doesn't.
I continue to feel like I'm stuck in this stupid weird middle ground dead zone when it comes to online dating.
I live a really active lifestyle, both socially and physically, and my ideal match would be able to join me in my outings. I'm not talking anything extreme but I like to go backpacking/camping, running, rock climbing, etc.
At the same time I'm just average build, probably could lose 5-10 lbs. I'm also average looks at best. And I have the cliche nerdy interests, that although don't take over my life are still important to me.
So I get two types of high matches: 1)Girls who match me intellectually and nerdy wise but aren't interested in outdoors (like they explicitly say so). 2) Or girls, that for lack of better words, have way better options when it comes to physical attraction (whihc let's face it, is a huge deal online).
0
Options
KupotheAvengerDestroyer of Cakeand other deserts.Registered Userregular
I continue to feel like I'm stuck in this stupid weird middle ground dead zone when it comes to online dating.
I live a really active lifestyle, both socially and physically, and my ideal match would be able to join me in my outings. I'm not talking anything extreme but I like to go backpacking/camping, running, rock climbing, etc.
At the same time I'm just average build, probably could lose 5-10 lbs. I'm also average looks at best. And I have the cliche nerdy interests, that although don't take over my life are still important to me.
So I get two types of high matches: 1)Girls who match me intellectually and nerdy wise but aren't interested in outdoors (like they explicitly say so). 2) Or girls, that for lack of better words, have way better options when it comes to physical attraction (whihc let's face it, is a huge deal online).
Totally been there dude. Although you have a fatal flaw in your logic. 2) Who the fuck cares if they have "better" matches? Just go for it, there isn't really downside for trying, and you need to value yourself as the awesome unicorn you are. Truly nerdy athletes are rare. Athletes that pretend to be nerdy (since its trendy) are way too common. You kick ass, so just go for it.
Shared interests are great, but in my experience they don't adequately predict or determine compatibility. Personally, I'd rather have an intelligent, assertive, and kind woman over one who simply shares my nerdy interests. An overlap of those are preferred, yet focusing on interests has led me into some bad relationships. The way I look at it, an intelligent woman is guranteed to have interests in common with me anyway. Not playing games with her doesn't seem so bad in the long run if we get along. Too many of my friends look for geeky women specifically and it's a mistake.
Still, I never seem to take my own advice.
I've heard recently that finding people with similar dislikes tends to be better than similar likes overall.
Shared interests are great, but in my experience they don't adequately predict or determine compatibility. Personally, I'd rather have an intelligent, assertive, and kind woman over one who simply shares my nerdy interests. An overlap of those are preferred, yet focusing on interests has led me into some bad relationships. The way I look at it, an intelligent woman is guranteed to have interests in common with me anyway. Not playing games with her doesn't seem so bad in the long run if we get along. Too many of my friends look for geeky women specifically and it's a mistake.
Still, I never seem to take my own advice.
I've heard recently that finding people with similar dislikes tends to be better than similar likes overall.
That's interesting and sounds pretty reasonable. What was the explanation given?
0
Options
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
It's been awhile since I read it but I think it was something about people usually feeling more strongly about things they dislike.
Posts
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
Unless you are one of the very, very few men in this thread lucky enough to be considerably more attractive to women than the average, you should still expect a response rate of between 1 in 10 to 1 in 50 (or more) to an initial message even on OKC. Not all those responses will be positive either.
That's part of why we commiserate in this thread much of the time. The first blast of feeling like you're the ugliest, most uninteresting, and most socially obtuse person on earth after the initial enthusiasm wears off can be intense. Online dating has its highs and lows just like any other method of dating.
Steam Profile
3DS: 3454-0268-5595 Battle.net: SteelAngel#1772
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
It's something to look forward to since I get one about once a day/evening.
I don't count responses from people who are clearly bored or abusive or self-obsessed time wasters. But one good, promising message out of 100. Of those, maybe one in four turns into a date.
I'm going to get a decent photo and give Tinder a try. It takes a good hour to send ten messages and with such a low return it's not really worth it. Swiping seems significantly more efficient.
I can say that Tinder is indeed a much more efficient way of being unresponded to compared to OKC.
Steam Profile
3DS: 3454-0268-5595 Battle.net: SteelAngel#1772
And sometimes I might not even have to pay for it!
But I don't want meaningless sex.
Amen.
Nothing new on my front which I guess is good news. I think the potential storm as been avoided by my last message and thing's will cool off for now. Plan is to contact her again once we near the time of departure (like a week before or so).
My experience on Tinder says I don't have to worry about not being responded to because I don't match with anyone. Except the predictable bot with hot girl pictures and some generic inspirational saying.
F that
Really I liked having a social life when I dated now I look at it as do I really want to in this state?
1) I have met Kupo and he's not ugly.
2) I met some girl on Coffee Meets Bagel and it's been going really well for the last month or so. So that's good! Each time we've hung out, it's been for 3++ hours.
Hope all you people are doing well. To the person considering dating someone he doesn't find attractive - just don't. This girl isn't a tool to build your self esteem.
Nothing wrong with that!
I met my boyfriend on a forum about 3 years ago. Never had any success with dating sites though. Got a lot of messages from guys who had absolutely nothing in common with me...
Still, I never seem to take my own advice.
That last reply I sent to the girl? Well, it actually never made it, so she hadn't heard from me since Wednesday. We both got a message today saying that my message didn't arrive, and so we began our contact anew. I guess the wait time was a good thing because she was really forthcoming, and interested in doing some of the stuff I had planned for the trip. So yay for that
21st century foreplay.
I disagree. Someone's interests say much about their character. Interaction is also the basis of any relationship.
Shared interests are extremely important. I just don't think any subset should be prioritized over personality traits.
Yeah - a lack of shared interests is evidence of dissimilar worldviews. Which, in my experience, is big trouble. Of course, overly shared interests can be just as problematic.
I politely disagree with this. It isn't so much dissimilar worldview as dissimilar experience. My gf is a huge workaholic, not because she is averse to fun, but because she was raised as a psychotic workaholic. That being said, I've slowly been introducing things to her, and while she isn't a rampant whovian, we both agree that Frank Underwood is an evil evil, inspiring man. But this all came from the difference of interests than anything else. Your partner should be complimentary, because lord knows if I was dating myself, I'd commit suicide.
Battlenet: Judgement#1243
psn: KupoZero
I dunno, I never felt this to be the case. Of course I rarely interact with people with whom I share no interests whatsoever. And of course it depends on what we mean by "interests". I have an interest in not getting up at 6 on a weekend to go hiking and I wouldn't be compatible with a girl who didn't share that interest, but I get the feeling that not everyone means "interests" in such a broad way.
I think a lot of guys, and particularly nerds, mean by shared "interests" shared hobbies.
It's not all or nothing.
If someone likes nothing but reality shows, soap operas, and judge Judy then we're not going to get along. I don't care how smart you are (but those shows are really shallow anyway so maybe they're poor examples). Same goes with Fox News and other sorts of entertainment indicative of right wing views. If you like horror movies then you like to be scared. If you like mysteries then you like to think. If you like documentaries then you like to learn. Every form of entertainment makes statements that must be accepted on some level to be enjoyed. That speaks to your character. Plus some shared activities both of you enjoy are necessary for a healthy long term relationship.
Edit: so no, not necessarily hobbies. Science and philosophy also fit the bill
One can also all like those things without liking movies. I agree that what a person likes tells you something about that person, but a lack of liking something doesn't.
Agreed, but a dislike would.
facetime. scheduled visits. don't schedule times to talk at night though. you'll end up resenting each other.
Battlenet: Judgement#1243
psn: KupoZero
I continue to feel like I'm stuck in this stupid weird middle ground dead zone when it comes to online dating.
I live a really active lifestyle, both socially and physically, and my ideal match would be able to join me in my outings. I'm not talking anything extreme but I like to go backpacking/camping, running, rock climbing, etc.
At the same time I'm just average build, probably could lose 5-10 lbs. I'm also average looks at best. And I have the cliche nerdy interests, that although don't take over my life are still important to me.
So I get two types of high matches: 1)Girls who match me intellectually and nerdy wise but aren't interested in outdoors (like they explicitly say so). 2) Or girls, that for lack of better words, have way better options when it comes to physical attraction (whihc let's face it, is a huge deal online).
Totally been there dude. Although you have a fatal flaw in your logic. 2) Who the fuck cares if they have "better" matches? Just go for it, there isn't really downside for trying, and you need to value yourself as the awesome unicorn you are. Truly nerdy athletes are rare. Athletes that pretend to be nerdy (since its trendy) are way too common. You kick ass, so just go for it.
Battlenet: Judgement#1243
psn: KupoZero
I've heard recently that finding people with similar dislikes tends to be better than similar likes overall.
That's interesting and sounds pretty reasonable. What was the explanation given?
Did I propose interactionless relationships?
No. I didn't even imply that you did.
How do people deal with intimidatingly awesome guys/girls you meet?
Like with any other interesting person.
Talk to them, get to know them better, see if there is a connection beyond the initial meet-up.
Start some small talk, get into bigger talks and become relaxed with each other.
Realize that awesome is a matter of perspective, change your perspective, engage as peer. Repeat as needed. Profit.
Battlenet: Judgement#1243
psn: KupoZero