# On-Line Dating, Cont'd... Part II **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [December 21, 2004, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921 "2004-12-21T03:51:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Hunter\_Hawk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/50afbb/32.png) [@Hunter\_Hawk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hunter_Hawk)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/21 "2004-12-23T08:16:30Z")
> [@Hunter Hawk](#): > > If I get some spare time at some point, I’ll work through both sites’ quizzes again and see what happens. Update: OKCupid still doesn’t like me. Granted, it lists matches, but I still end up with the suggestion to go away. Interestingly, the description of the equivalent personality type for females doesn’t have that suggestion. Viva la double standard! I’ll re-take the eHarmony test in a few days. ---
**Author:** ![tremorviolet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e47774/32.png) [@tremorviolet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tremorviolet)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/22 "2004-12-23T16:44:53Z")
> [@Hunter Hawk](#): > > Update: OKCupid still doesn’t like me. Granted, it lists matches, but I still end up with the suggestion to go away. Interestingly, the description of the equivalent personality type for females doesn’t have that suggestion. Viva la double standard! > > I’ll re-take the eHarmony test in a few days. Outta curiosity, what personality type does it list you as? I wouldn’t totally give up anyway, I don’t put a huge amount into those tests. Answering a lot of questions does more for the actual matching (that’s really what the matching is based on, not the OKCupid test. There’s a link that talks about the algorithim they use if you’re of the geeky persuasion). But, I was just doing for fun anyway and enjoy answering questions. ---
**Author:** ![jimpatro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@jimpatro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jimpatro)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/23 "2004-12-23T19:52:06Z")
While I agree that personality criteria may be too specific as to weed out someone who might actually work out, I think on-line dating is preferable to the alternatives. I’ve been introduced to all my friends available friends. Meeting someone by chance out in the real world is a very rare occassion. On-line dating provides a comfortable way to “meet” new people. And a means to date often. I think one must date many people to find the right one. Perhaps the high divorce rate is related to people trying to make a relationship work that wasn’t a true match in the first place. The tough thing about on-line dating is being able to walk away early if things don’t click. Misnomer may have just experienced this from the “wrong” end. ---
**Author:** ![Misnomer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/misnomer/32/14897_2.png) [@Misnomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Misnomer)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/24 "2004-12-23T20:06:51Z")
> [@jimpatro](#): > > Misnomer may have just experienced this from the “wrong” end. You mean **Sunspace**. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Oregon\_sunshine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/50afbb/32.png) [@Oregon\_sunshine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oregon_sunshine)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/25 "2004-12-23T20:19:17Z")
> [@](#): > > before Photoshop comes into play… :eek: People _Photoshop_ their online personal ad pictures!?!?!? ( :eek: ) ---
**Author:** ![jimpatro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@jimpatro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jimpatro)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/26 "2004-12-23T20:20:16Z")
Oops, thanks. ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/27 "2004-12-23T20:33:10Z")
> [@ultrafilter](#): > > eHarmony has ties to the Christian right, and caters towards socially conservative, marriage-minded folks. I did notice their questions aren’t very atheist-friendly. When it asks me whether “spirituality” is important, do I answer “no” if I want to meet an atheist? Or “yes” to let the system know that what they enter in the “relilgion” column should have high priority? (Atheism _is_ one of the choices, IIRC.) But they do advertise on Air America Radio. Or at least their NYC affiliate, which I think is the one they stream on the internet. ---
**Author:** ![Hunter\_Hawk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/50afbb/32.png) [@Hunter\_Hawk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hunter_Hawk)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/28 "2004-12-24T00:27:53Z")
> [@tremorviolet](#): > > Outta curiosity, what personality type does it list you as? I wouldn’t totally give up anyway, I don’t put a huge amount into those tests. Answering a lot of questions does more for the actual matching (that’s really what the matching is based on, not the OKCupid test. There’s a link that talks about the algorithim they use if you’re of the geeky persuasion). But, I was just doing for fun anyway and enjoy answering questions. Yeah, I get it about the responses to the other questions being used for matching. And while I realize that they’re supposed to be fun little tests and so forth, I still have enough of a psych background to be less than thrilled about the wording of a lot of the questions. Anyhoo, about my personality type–I’m listed as: > [@OKCupid](#): > > **The Manchild** > Random Brutal Love Dreamer (RBLDm) > > Hopeful. Awkward. Soft-headed. Fire intrigues you. You are The Manchild. > > Okay, Manchildren have some good qualities. They can be unpredictable, brash, magnetic–and therefore highly charismatic. Particularly, you’re passionate and are often a hell of a lot of fun. > > But we’d like you to consider not using OkCupid. You can be unthinking and hurtful, and we think you LIKE seeing bad things happen. You’ve had a moderate number of relationships, but broken a disproportionate number of hearts. In total, you mean well, but don’t really have it together. > > It’s up to you, of course, whether to continue dating. There are plenty of women out there who do deserve you. But you’ve heard our advice. The dimensions are: Deliberate/Random Gentle/Brutal Love/Sex Dreamer/Master …with the descriptions as follows: Deliberate: Makes decisions carefully. Is aware of, and weighs, consequences. Takes time to think things through. Random: Rash, bold, unpredictable. Makes decisions faster and less carefully than the average person. Gentle: Kind. Considerate. Less selfish than average. Cares about the happiness of nearby people. Brutal: More selfish than average. Selectively moral. Love: Love is subject’s primary motivation. Sex: Sex is subject’s primary motivation. Dreamer: Relatively innocent. Unjaded. Possessing undiscovered potential. Evolving. Master: Seasoned. Refined. Possessing perspective and thorough knowledge. Incidentally, here’s the RBLD female description: > [@OKCupid](#): > > The Wild Rose > Random Brutal Love Dreamer (RBLDf) > > Colorful, but unpicked. You are The Wild Rose. > > Prone to bouts of cynicism, sarcasm, and thorns, you excite a certain kind of man. Hoping to gather you up, he flirts and winks and asks you out, ultimately professing his love. Then you make him bleed. Why? Because you’re the rare, independent, self-sufficient kind of woman who does want love, but not from a weakling. > > You don’t seem to take yourself too seriously, and that’s refreshing. You aren’t uptight; you don’t over-plan. Romance-wise, sex isn’t a top priority–a true relationship would be preferable. For your age, you haven’t had a lot of bonafide love experience, though, and this kind of gets to core of the issue. You’re very selective. > > The problem is them, not you, right? You have lofty standards that few measure up to. You’re out there all right, but not to be picked up by just anyone. > > _“You’re never truly single as long as you have yourself.”_ ---
**Author:** ![Alice\_The\_Goon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Alice\_The\_Goon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alice_The_Goon)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/29 "2004-12-24T03:02:31Z")
How do you get those results, anyway, on okcupid? I assume by answering all the questions. It takes days on end to get through them! There are over 1600 of them! Am I missing something here, or does it take everyone several days to get through the thing, going at it hours at a time? ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/30 "2004-12-24T03:14:26Z")
> [@trublmakr](#): > > How do you get those results, anyway, on okcupid? I assume by answering all the questions. It takes days on end to get through them! There are over 1600 of them! Am I missing something here, or does it take everyone several days to get through the thing, going at it hours at a time? Take their [test](http://www.okcupid.com/oktest). ---
**Author:** ![Misnomer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/misnomer/32/14897_2.png) [@Misnomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Misnomer)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/31 "2004-12-24T03:57:33Z")
Wow, **Hunter Hawk** , that double standard is really disappointing! ☹ It’s also disappointing that they would have an answer that suggested you not use the site. I love the category I got put into, but I think I just got lucky; when I’m looking at profiles, I pay more attention to the match percentages (which come from the individual questions, if I’m correct) than to any test results. Test results are fun (for some of us!), but far from conclusive. > [@trublmakr](#): > > Am I missing something here, or does it take everyone several days to get through the thing, going at it hours at a time? Heh: when I first created my profile, I tried to answer “all” of the questions at once. At first the “percent completed” number went up quite steadliy, but the closer it got to 100% the slower it increased. After several hours I finally realized that I didn’t _have_ to answer all of the questions at once. :smack: So no, you’re not the only one. 🙂 I’m hooked on answering those questions, though – even more than on taking the tests. As of right now I’ve answered 900 questions, and am at something like 96%. At 500 questions I became able to make up my own, but haven’t taken advantage of that yet. Gotta think of just the right stuff to ask. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![stpauler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@stpauler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stpauler)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/32 "2004-12-24T04:28:25Z")
“Amusing” flash cartoon for us online daters. It’s called "[She fricking blocked me".](http://www.letslol.com/blockme.htm) (Sound needed and it’s safe for work.) ---
**Author:** ![Qwerty\_not\_Dvorak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/bcef8e/32.png) [@Qwerty\_not\_Dvorak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qwerty_not_Dvorak)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/33 "2004-12-24T05:17:19Z")
So as another loser, err I mean twentysomething single :smack:, I typically use AIM with my buddies, what sites give you profiles and IM names for free? [Love.com](http://Love.com) and [thedilly.com](http://thedilly.com) do but any others? ---
**Author:** ![Misnomer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/misnomer/32/14897_2.png) [@Misnomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Misnomer)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/34 "2004-12-24T18:54:31Z")
> [@stpauler](#): > > “Amusing” flash cartoon for us online daters. That was cute! I even laughed out loud once, near the end. 🙂 Thanks. > [@Qwerty\_not\_Dvorak](#): > > what sites give you profiles and IM names for free? The site that most of us in this thread are using/talking about is [OK Cupid](http://www.okcupid.com/), which is completely free. ---
**Author:** ![Misnomer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/misnomer/32/14897_2.png) [@Misnomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Misnomer)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/35 "2004-12-29T03:26:31Z")
About an hour ago I logged into e-mail to find a message from “Bob.” He dumped me. :mad: > [@](#): > > Over the last week, and while so sick the week before, I’ve been thinking about how nice it has been to meet you and spend some time together. I’ve had a lot of fun and hope you have too. You are good company and I think you know I’m attracted to you. But I’ve also begun to realize that we don’t have all that much in common. > > In the heat of the moment, this hardly matters compared to a night of great sex. But calmer reflection reminds that sex alone, no matter how good, is not enough. As important – the promise of a great time in bed with you does not warrant the likely false promise of believing there can be much more. > > While getting to know you has been a pleasure, Misnomer, I feel it best that it ends here. I am sorry. ::sigh:: Oh well, at least I can start 2005 with a clean slate, and message the guys in the profiles that I liked the other week . . . ---
**Author:** ![Alice\_The\_Goon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Alice\_The\_Goon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alice_The_Goon)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/36 "2004-12-29T04:20:15Z")
Aw, man, stupid Bob. But yes, it’s a fresh new year, with lots of fresh new opportunities. Last night I had a second date with the second guy I had been talking to. (Not the second guy _ever_, the second guy I mentioned, I’ve been doing this for a couple of years.) I know I said I knew after the first date that he wasn’t for me, but I decided to give him another chance, after all, lots of times when you get to know someone you end up liking them, right? Bad idea. He is VERY yucky (he hadn’t seemed that bad, but then I was drinking) and now I have to send _him_ the dump e-mail. I do have two new prospects, however, and one of them is exceedingly cute. 😃 At least his picture says he is. I hope you meet the right person soon, **Misnomer** , if that’s what you’re looking for. ---
**Author:** ![lost\_in\_the\_post](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/50afbb/32.png) [@lost\_in\_the\_post](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lost_in_the_post)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/37 "2004-12-29T15:00:42Z")
> [@Misnomer](#): > > Bob: “promise … does not warrant the likely false promise of believing …” Sounds like a bad lawyer, anyways. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Thinks2Much](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Thinks2Much](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thinks2Much)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/38 "2004-12-29T16:33:15Z")
> [@Misnomer](#): > > Heh: when I first created my profile, I tried to answer “all” of the questions at once. At first the “percent completed” number went up quite steadliy, but the closer it got to 100% the slower it increased. After several hours I finally realized that I didn’t _have_ to answer all of the questions at once. > > :smack: > > So no, you’re not the only one. 🙂 > > I’m hooked on answering those questions, though – even more than on taking the tests. As of right now I’ve answered 900 questions, and am at something like 96%. At 500 questions I became able to make up my own, but haven’t taken advantage of that yet. Gotta think of just the right stuff to ask. 😉 I never posted in the other thread, I only lurked- but I joined OKCupid because of it. I got hooked on answering the questions, too, and finally answered the last of them over the weekend. I am still not at 100% - 97.5%. I am guessing it is a power curve or something where 100% just isn’t possible. But once you have answered all the questions, you get to give feedback on questions others have submitted and they give you a virtual cookie (chocolate chip, even.) 🆒 I have made some of my own questions, but I think they took the holidays off, because one has been sitting there for two weeks and hasn’t been rejected or approved. The first two I submitted were rejected within 48 hours. ---
**Author:** ![tremorviolet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e47774/32.png) [@tremorviolet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tremorviolet)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/39 "2004-12-29T16:44:27Z")
> [@Hunter Hawk](#): > > Yeah, I get it about the responses to the other questions being used for matching. And while I realize that they’re supposed to be fun little tests and so forth, I still have enough of a psych background to be less than thrilled about the wording of a lot of the questions. > > Anyhoo, about my personality type–I’m listed as: _The Manchild_ Hey, I just got around to rereading this thread. That’s so weird that they actually suggest you not use the site; I didn’t think any of the types would say that. FWIW, I actually got the _WildRose_ classification. Bizarre how different the descriptions are for what should be essentially the same personality type. Yeah, I think most of the matching stuff is bunk but’s it’s fun to play with. If it’s any consolation, I never look at the classification. I just noticed the last guy I emailed is a _Hornivore_. :dubious: I was kinda excited about this stuff for a week or two but now I’m in my “wow, it’s such a pain in the ass to keep up with this stuff and am I really that horny anyway?” phase. I need to log back in and respond to guys I’ve already corresponded with but I’m not really excited about any of them so I’ve been avoiding it. I don’t think I approach online dating with the right attitude… ---
**Author:** ![Misnomer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/misnomer/32/14897_2.png) [@Misnomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Misnomer)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921/40 "2004-12-29T17:05:03Z")
> [@trublmakr](#): > > Aw, man, stupid Bob. Thanks. 🙂 > [@](#): > > _now I have to send **him** the dump e-mail._ Eh, they’re a fact of dating. Never easy to send or receive, though. What caught me off guard about the one I got was that I thought our two dates went well: we _did_ have things in common, and both conversations seemed natural and easy; the mutual attraction was obvious; the second date ended with Bob saying we’d see each other soon, then an e-mail saying that he was pretty busy but just needed a couple of days to figure out when he could see me again; then there was the two weeks o’ silence; then the “throw me a bone” e-mail after I’d clearly given him an easy way out if he was no longer interested. And it took him a week after _that_ to let me know that there will never be a 3rd date. :rolleyes: The whole sex paragraph annoyed me, too. I mean, we both knew where things were heading, but he really didn’t need to tell me that I wasn’t even worth a one-night stand. And the assumption that _I_ would have wanted anything more was kind of arrogant. > [@](#): > > I hope you meet the right person soon, **Misnomer** , if that’s what you’re looking for. Well, what I’m looking for depends a lot on who I’m looking at, if that makes any sense. 🙂 In general, though, I’m not looking for a soulmate, I’d just like to find someone with the same outlook on dating that I have: the “getting to know you” part is just as important as the sex part, but the latter might move a little faster than the former. I’m pretty enthusiastic about sex, but that doesn’t mean I’m only interested in booty calls – nor does sex = serious relationship in my world (though it _does_ tend to equal monogomy; can a relationship be monogomous without being serious? Hmm, I smell an IMHO thread . . .). It would also be nice to meet someone who pays attention to what I say that I want, instead of what they think that I want. Heck, even someone who bothers to _ask_ me what I want would be nice: Bob never asked me what kind of relationship I was looking for, instead he spent 3 weeks in isolation coming to his own conclusions. Putz. 😉 > [@lost in the post](#): > > Sounds like a bad lawyer, anyways. Heh. 🙂 > [@Thinks2Much](#): > > But once you have answered all the questions, you get to give feedback on questions others have submitted and they give you a virtual cookie (chocolate chip, even.) 🆒 Cool, I didn’t know about the feedback thing . . . and the virtual cookie is my kind of incentive! 😃 > [@tremorviolet](#): > > FWIW, I actually got the **WildRose** classification. Bizarre how different the descriptions are for what should be essentially the same personality type. Yeah: I’m “[The Playstation](http://www.okcupid.com/personality?type=RGSM&g=2&o=1),” and apparently OK Cupid thinks I’m perfect and don’t need to do anything differently. But my male counterpart, “[The Playboy](http://www.okcupid.com/personality?type=RGSM&g=1&o=1),” gets this advice: “If you’re feeling unfulfilled, maybe you should _raise_ your standards. New conquests will only be satisfying if there’s a possibility of rejection.” So his standards are too low but mine are perfect? Riiight . . . :rolleyes: 😉 > [@](#): > > _I don’t think I approach online dating with the right attitude…_ That was my problem the first few times I tried it: I’d be sitting around one night, all lonely, and decide to create a profile, but then when it came time to send messages or reply to the ones I received I just wasn’t into it. A few times I got to the “meet in person” stage, but each time I quickly realized that the guy could have been perfect for me and I _still_ wouldn’t have really been interested. So I always wound up quitting after a month or two. This time around, though, I think that I’m actually ready to be dating. 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-line-dating-contd-part-ii/280921.md?page=3)