|
|
|
|
#1
10-04-2006, 04:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Tell me about your online dating experiences
After my recent break up, I decided the best way to mend my broken heart is to get back on that horse and date around a little bit. So I am.
I signed up on match.com not really knowing the first thing to expect out of the whole deal. I figured the guy is the one who will probably do the first contact, so I've been sending out some emails, making sure they're personalized to the profile I'm reading. Through my limited experiences, it seems like the vast majority of people don't even bother replying. Is this standard? I get an email back on about 1 out of 3 I send. Am I doing something wrong, or is this just how it works? Is every replied email basically a guaranteed date, or should there be some volleying of emails back and forth before the date offer? Give me the basics on this whole deal. I'm completely blind. 
|
| Advertisements | |
|
|
|
|
#2
10-04-2006, 04:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
A reply to one in three e-mails? Trust me, you're doing great.
|
|
#3
10-04-2006, 04:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
My sister signed up for a few of these dating sites also and from what I understand, 1 out of 3 is not so bad. A lot of people who sign up for these sites either:
1) Forgot they signed up and never follow up with the sign up. 2) Might not be as interested in you (nothing personal, but some people are selective and not as polite in responding to e-mails). 3) Are married. My sister has dated a few guys she met on these sites and has not had much luck (specifically the site you mentioned). She has met some weirdos, a stalker, and a few guys who just wanted sex. The most recent one was married, claimed to work for the associated press and the last thing he told her (when he stood her up) was that he had a last minute interview with Hugo Chavez. She has more luck with eharmony, believe it or not.
|
|
#4
10-04-2006, 04:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#5
10-04-2006, 04:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Back when I was still making some attempt to date, the response rate I got was about 1:50 from Match.com and a couple of other services (sample size ~600). I, too, tried to write personal, three paragraph, eqoluent, clever e-mails, but in the end, I pretty much had a standard message that I'd sub in a few personal details and let fly. (This permitted me to get back to my whiskey quicker, as I found composing a coherent response after more than two jiggers of Black Bush to result in too many spelling and grammatical errors, though in retrospect it still would have been more coherent than many received from presumably sober correspondents.)
I wouldn't set your expectations too high, but then, I'm coloring with my own experience, which has been on the sore side of successful in any dating venue. If you're getting a response from 1 in 3 I'd say you're doing pretty damn good. Good luck to you. Stranger
|
|
#6
10-04-2006, 04:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
 Aside from an utter eschewal of religion I'm pretty vanilla. I can't figure out what I do that is so offensive in the eyes of Dr. Neil Clark Warren, but in retrospect, I don't think I'd be well suited to the population of doe-eyed lobotomy victims that eHarmony presents in their ads as satisfied customers. Stranger
|
|
#7
10-04-2006, 04:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, it worked for me, so now I tell everyone I know who's single and looking and giving up that they should get their butts online.
Yes, most people will ignore your e-mails. Most of the ones who reply will be strange creepy needy people. But it's a much quicker way of meeting and weeding out a lot of potential partners. After sending a few emails you can tell whether someone's worth dating or not. I'd recommend exchanging some e-mail or instant messaging for a while before committing to a date, because sometimes you get to know the person a little better and realize that they're not quite what you're looking for. Or, that they're absolutely perfect for you! My best experiences were with the site OKCupid. It's free, and you answer hundreds of questions about your views and values and opinions, and you can also indicate what your ideal match would answer to the same questions. If Match.com is working well for you, though, keep it up!
|
|
#8
10-04-2006, 04:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#9
10-04-2006, 05:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'll agree that a 1-in-3 response rate is very good, bordering on phenomenal. As far as the date:response ratio, IME it's much lower than 1:1 (I won't say just how much lower, as it would send me spiraling into depression
 ), but then I don't get a 1:3 response ratio either.Really, just go with the flow. A few e-mails back and forth are the norm, but IMHO the sooner you meet in person the better, so do whatever works and feels comfortable for you.
|
|
#10
10-04-2006, 05:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Others have already said it, on in three from match.com is outstanding for a man. A large number of profiles are from people who are still log on every week or so but whose paid membership has expired. It looks like they're active but they're not. They can't even read your email.
I have had a ton of luck with craigslist plus it's free. I should ad that by "luck" I mean have met a lot of women in person. Most first dates end right at the first date due to mutual disinterest or whatever. In the last year I have dated four women for a few weeks each and met all of them on craigs.
|
|
#11
10-04-2006, 05:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
1 in 3 is sounding better and better, but to be fair I've only sent out like 10 emails, so I've gotten only gotten 3 responses. Not the best sample for my ratio, I guess.
I'll give OKCupid and craigslist a shot too... my city just recently got a craigslist, so I probably won't have as much luck there as an established one. Still worth a shot.
|
|
#12
10-04-2006, 08:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I've met a very good female friend through these, but for the most part it is very hard to find
someone with whom you have any sort of chemistry with (on any or all levels-at least it was for me).
|
|
#13
10-04-2006, 11:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yeah, congrats on the 1 in 3 rate. Don't be surprised if some of them just stop answering your emails though. It is rare that someone will write back specifically to reject you.
My usual strategy is to send emails back and forth with the person for at least a couple of weeks until I feel fairly confident they're not crazy/dangerous before meeting in person. If all goes well, then set up a low-pressure, brief meeting (coffee or something of that nature). I do think that the online thing makes it a lot easier to screen the true weirdos out beforehand. So far I have had decent results doing that. All of my dates have been at least mediocre, no truly horrible ones yet thankfully.  Good luck!
|
|
#14
10-04-2006, 11:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Oh yeah, and I agree that the chemistry issue is tricky. If someone seems nice on the first date but no sparks fly, personally I would recommend giving them at least 1 or 2 more dates just to see if something develops. Trying to get used to being around someone in person can be awkward even if you hit it off really well online.
|
|
#15
10-05-2006, 12:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I've been dating via online channels exclusively for 10 years now. It seems so much easier and more practical to me than having to leave home and be out at specific times of day to meet people
I ususally make myself a nice profile (I've used Yahoo pretty much exclusively since 1999 or so), contact as many boys as I find that I might like, and wait. Usually I give out my screen name, too. Yahoo lets you use a pseudonym screen name and let people know when you're online. Sometimes I even forego the email contact and chat guys up right on the spot. For some reason I find it really easy to tell if a guy I'm chatting with will be a good match. We'll chat for a week or so and if we want, meet. So far I've made one lifelong friend, had one intense 3-year relationship, and a couple of under-a-year relationships. Even a one-night stand Just remember that it's still pretty early and you had a rocky breakup. Be sure to DATE for a while (a handful of girls you like to go out and have fun with) instead of trying to figure out if each woman you email will be THE ONE.
|
|
#16
10-05-2006, 11:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Anyway, hajario mentioned that people may log in who actually can't read my email or reply. I've mostly stuck to people whose profile says they've logged in within the last week. Does the response rate go down dramatically if they haven't logged in for a couple weeks? Also, while the emailing thing is going on before the date, are there phone calls? I absolutely, positively hate having phone conversations, so I hope this isn't the case.
|
|
#17
10-05-2006, 12:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#18
10-05-2006, 01:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
One word: MySpace.
No, it's not a dating site per se, but if you're reasonably good-looking and have an interesting profile, women will flock to you. Granted, some of them can be crazy or flaky, but they're fairly easy to weed out. Bonus points are incurred if your profile says that you're single, but you didn't add "Dating/Serious Relationships" to it. That makes you sound desperate. Just leave it at "Friends." I've had well over a dozen women (including a recent one that actually seems to like my socially inept self and wants to see me again!) contact me in the last few months. Aside from people I know IRL, no guy has ever requested a Friend add from me. People seem to know the deal on MySpace. "Friends" rarely ever means "friends" when it comes to the opposite sex.
|
|
#19
10-05-2006, 01:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Also, isn't it owned by Rupert Murdoch? :: shudder ::
__________________
Rigardu, kaj vi ekvidos. Look, and you will begin to see.
|
|
#20
10-05-2006, 01:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yeah, those are both downsides, but FWIW, one of the women on my Friends list (she really is a friend, nothing more) is almost as old as my parents.
|
|
#21
10-05-2006, 01:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#22
10-05-2006, 01:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Myspace and OKcupid rule. The rest aren't worth wasting your money, at least in my experience and the experiences of other people I've known. eHarmony seems to be the absolute worst if you're under 35 and not Christian.
|
|
#23
10-05-2006, 02:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#24
10-05-2006, 02:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Late 50s, although I admit that most people on MySpace seem to be under 35; my friend is likely an exception.
|
|
#25
10-05-2006, 04:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
myspace is pretty sparse if you're over 35. (I did meet one woman from myspace but she's in her late 20's.) OKCupid is even worse in that respect.
wasson, I wouldn't waste your time on someone who hasn't logged-in in over three weeks or so. Their account probably isn't active anymore. I agree with the poster who said that emails will sometimes peter out for no reason. That happened to me a few times on match even when they made the initial contact.
|
|
#26
10-05-2006, 04:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I don't use online dating or hook-up sites too much. But every experience has I've had has been a good one.
I'd much rather meet someone face to face. In fact when I've met guys on the Internet, the less said in the emails and phone calls the better. I feel you don't really get to know a person until you've met each other (in person).
|
|
#27
10-05-2006, 10:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, we celebrated our fourth wedding anniversay last August.
LIke others have said, online dating is an introduction service, basically; email or chat a few times, then go meet in person (meeting in a neutral place like a coffeeshop, of course). It's the face-to-face meetings that tell you if there is anything happening between you or not. Send emails to anyone who interests you, chat with anybody, go out and do meet-and-greets with people who seem compatible; just think of it as a crash course in dating school. The more you date, the better you'll get at it.
|
|
#28
10-05-2006, 10:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#29
10-06-2006, 12:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I've been online dating for years now, off and on. I recently got a free weekend from e-harmony ($60 a month is a bit much for me, so I took advantage of it), and have been chatting with one man for a couple of weeks.
It is incredible the amount of things we have in common and how similiar we are in terms of our goals and values. We are both very excited to meet (Monday), and if that goes well, I can totally see a long relationship from this. It sounds crazy, but it's really unbelievable how we have seemed to click. Maybe it is better, the way they send people to you instead of you going through profiles and choosing out of hundreds. We'll see.
|
|
#30
10-06-2006, 03:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I tried both eHarmony and another site whose name has slipped my mind. Both offered matches based upon rather pitiful ~20 question "match questionaires." The results I got (which were few and far between) were not at all what I was looking for.*
I then tried OkCupid. OkCupid allows you to answer over 2000 questions and select the answers your ideal mate would answer in addition to how important the question is to you. The matching system is much, much more realistic, and they do it all for free. I met Seren through OkCupid last November, and we've been together ever since. *I'm 25 (and was looking for someone in her mid-twenties), so part of the problem could be that the majority of people on these sites tend to be older, whereas OkCupid seems to be populated by a much younger crowd.
|
|
#31
10-07-2006, 03:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
My last online dating experience ultimately ended with this pretty shiny wedding ring I now wear
It is no different than conventional dating though in that it still takes time and you may have to sift through alot of duds before you find "the one". Good luck!!
|
|
#32
10-09-2006, 01:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thanks for the tips, everyone. What do you make of this?
I emailed a girl who I seemingly had a lot in common with. 2 days later, she sends me a "wink". Is this because Free members can only wink? Can she still read my emails if I send her my email address or something? How else can I contact her if she doesn't pay up?
|
|
#33
10-09-2006, 02:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Write her again, but if she doesn't figure this out -- well, then she's not smart enough to date a Doper, so no loss.
|
|
#34
10-09-2006, 02:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
You'll probably e-mail with a lot of people you'll never actually meet IRL, and many of those you do meet in real life you'll never see again. I don't want to be a downer, it's just that some people expect great things instantly. Although that can happen, it's not usually the case. I had a lot of fun using online personals. I met a few duds, but most of the guys I actually met in person were fun and we had good times. Sure, not every date was magic, but most weren't painful or awkward, either. After about a year of using a couple of different services on and off, I met my now-husband on Yahoo!Personals. 
|
|
#35
10-09-2006, 02:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
But free members can wink? Is there an easy way to figure out who is paid and who is not?
|
|
#36
10-09-2006, 02:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Yeah, it sucks. twicks, who was curious enough to cough up the $30 to see who emailed -- dammit.
|
|
#37
10-09-2006, 03:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Thanks for the explanation about the stuff paying members can see vs. non-paying members. This particular girl is pretty smokin' hot, so I hope she ponies up the cash to email me.
|
|
#39
10-09-2006, 04:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, never done it myself, however my GF has a perpetually single friend who lives on Match.com, MySpace, and so on. She's a little "off" and has a habit of stalking guys she likes who just aren't that into her. Basically just being a poster child for why you shouldn't put your personal shit online.
|
|
#40
10-09-2006, 04:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Yeah, putting my personal shit online may not be the best strategy, but I don't want to date another friend (since that turned out so terribly), and I don't want to date someone from work (which could potentially be worse than the friend thing), and I don't want to meet a chick in a bar. So I don't have a whole lot of options.
|
|
#41
10-09-2006, 05:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
As recently as earlier this year, you could see who emailed you, but not the contents of the letter, if you were not a paid member. That's no longer the case. The being able to wink for free made more sense then.
Let's say that twickster wasn't a paid member and winked at me. If I was a paid member, I could email her if I liked her and then she could pay to read my mail. If for some crazy reason I didn't like her, I would ignore the wink and she could save her money. I had someone wink at me once who wasn't a paid member and she cleverly hid her email address in her profile. I was able to email her directly and she never had to pay match. I guess enough people pulled crap like that so that they toughened up the rules but didn't bother to change the wink routine. It kind of sucks because I would pay to email someone who I really liked but a lot of the unsolicited email that men get is from scams. I would hate to pay up only to find out that I got an email from Ukraine or Nigeria. If I could see who emailed me, I would know if the profile is a fake.
|
|
#42
10-09-2006, 05:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
She's a non-paying member and I stumbled across her profile and emailed her. She got a notification from Match saying "a member" emailed her, but didn't say who. So while she was browsing, she figured she'd wink at me. Now, since I already emailed her, I'm not allowed to wink back. So, as a non-paying member, she won't know I tried to contact her before. And me, as a paying member, can't do anything to let her know I'm interested. Is this the long and short of it? If so, Match is dumb.
|
|
#44
10-10-2006, 09:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I don't know the ratio that I got, but I had quite a few replies so that I wasn't discouraged. I guess my advice is don't be an ass. Any jokes should be subdued and non-offensive initially. Also, make sure you are truthful in your profile. The point of online dating is to meet people who you think would be interesting to you. Separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. And for heavens sake don't do anything that makes you look desperate! It is the kiss of death! (No pressure there, hehe) My wife (well obviously she wasn't my wife then!!), on the other hand, had quite a few emails from people who were using the shotgun method. Why not just go down to the bar instead? She was getting mail from guys who, it seemed, hadn't even read her profile. Eg. "No bearded mountain man types" So, who does she get an email from? A bearded mountain man type. Oddly enough, by chance the guy in question ended up working out here in Yemen. I got along great with him. I didn't find out until just before he had finished his time here that he was the guy who had tried to date my wife. What are the odds?
|
|
#45
10-10-2006, 11:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I tried Lavalife and had a lot of fun. Mind you, I'm female, which helps. I'm also in my 20's, caucasian and childless, which I've been told makes a difference.
Bear in mind as well that the time of year also counts; the closer you get to Christmas and Valentine's Day, the more "smiles" you'll get.
|
|
#46
10-10-2006, 12:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I've always found it innovative & fun, and a whole lot cheaper, easier and more effective then going out or doing volunteer work/courses etc. I still did and do all those things, but for their own sake, not because I hoped to find " the one". I honestly would have found that rather depressing. I met my first SO ( 15 years together, broke up, still friends) through an online ad in the paper. I always thought, that the story of how we met was rather romantic, despite the stigma. Neither myself nor the guys who responded to my ad conformed to the loser-stigma attached to contact-ads; back then, I was a very attractive 22 year old blonde female student, and my SO, who responded to my ad, was a hottie too. Were he and I losers? No. We just were - rational ("It seems like an effective way of meeting people") - adventurous ("you never know who you're going to meet and thats nice about it" ) -enterprising (" You know what? I could use a relationship, so I'm gonna do what it takes") -and independent ("Yes, I know people think ads are for losers. Their loss.") My current fiancé and I met through a dating site and we've been together for 2 years now, and engaged to be married. My brother has met his GF just three months ago. My friend who is very beautiful girl (although not without problems) has met, gotten into a relationship and broken up again with 4 men in the past five months. Online dating just works. wasson, cheer up. I'm almos jealous of you; you've got some interesting months ahead if you dive in this on-line dating thing. Just go for it and spend the few bucks necessary to do so. Going to a bar four nights a month is much more expensive.
|
|
#47
10-10-2006, 01:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I started on m match.com in April. I don't really do winks so much as offers to take a woman to lunch and generally about 1/2 to 2/3rds respond. The direct response of match.com beats the hell out of awkwardly cruising bookstores and coffee houses hoping to "click" with someone.
I've had very positive responses with women my own age (I'm 48) . Interestingly women my own age or older seem to look at, or evaluate me, more as a lover and conversational partner. The women I dated in the low 40's seemed to (for whatever reason) be a lot more interested in my financial status. A few things I've leaned re online dating - and this is strictly IMO Physical attraction and various types of "clicking" can't be forced or developed. It's either there or it's not, and if it's not taking it on as "project" to be developed is a big mistake. In my age cohort if something's not happening by the second or third date it's time to move on. Drink very moderately. More than 1-2 beers and I tend to get a little too relaxed and talkative. You need to be relaxed and conversational, but you also need to keep a steady hand on the tiller re the impression you make. One glurgy slip and you're in the "no thanks" bin. I like women with some substance - not really fat but not skinny either. A nice set of hips is very sexy. I also tend to "fit" better with taller women. Little ladies are nice but I'm finding 5-5 to 6 feet is definitely preferable lovemaking, and making out wise. For whatever reason sex with women 45 years and older has been fantastic, and much better. less inhibited and more intense than with the younger women. Being well dressed and physically fit matters. Even if you can carry on the most sophisticated and esoteric conversations, a woman will still judge you by how she would feel if you were holding her. Confidence matters. even if you're nervous you need to be able to carry this off. This is why the aforesaid warning about being too effusive & glurgy comes in. Women like sensitivity and vulnerability, but only on their own terms. You had best clamp down on these aspects of your personality until your get to know her better.
|
|
#48
10-10-2006, 01:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
 <minor hijack> Out of curiousity, how is Craigslist as a dating site? Any tips on what to do/avoid? </minor hijack>
|
|
#49
10-10-2006, 02:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Stranger
|
|
#50
10-10-2006, 02:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I tried Match.com before quitting once, last year. Then I tried it again over the last summer and quit again, for the same reason. I was so overwhelmed by emails that I couldn't keep up with them--ranging from desperate to golddigging to player to way too much effort--online dating was definitely not easier than real life dating for me. Eventually stopped reading the emails ... they piled up to almost 30 unread in my inbox the last time I remember. Most of them I rejected for being obvious players, obvious golddiggers, or obvious mismatches (no, no more separated guys kthx).
The last email I got, became my current boyfriend. Don't know what attracted his email so to induce me to log in and reply. It was a simple introduction email; his wasn't the most charming or the most witty of the bunch. But I felt quite compelled to respond to him, and, yeah. 
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
