Mitten, interesting experiences, thanks for posting them.I joined Match.com a while back. It's been an interesting experience but very hit and miss. I do agree with your pic comment. I've sourcing a good one of me (apparently) from a photographer friend at the moment and then will add it to see if it makes any difference. It might just make a difference when replying and get less zero responses, esp from women who have a pic posted up.I had soured from the whole blind date thing recently. I came across something I perceived possibly to be 30+ women becoming extremely selective due to trying to select their "final" marriage material mate and doing that via blind dating. Whereas blind dates had been successful for me in the past, having crossed the 30+ barrier I've been finding their are almost always bad. Almost like the selection criteria upon meeting is so slim that you couldn't hope to match it, doing it on a blind date making it even more unlikely. So I just felt that for those reasons it was less likely to work at my age, just a theory. But I'm certainly interested to see if things change with a photo.The funniest thing I've found is that whether you go through replying to 30 individually written or one general reply about yourself to their ad, you may only get one or two replies if you are lucky, but that they'll complain if they seem like stock replies.. but then with the reply rate so low who has the time to write 30 individual, unique replies... catch 22! Again I would be interested to see if that sort of thing changes if upon viewing your profile there is a pic.PeteyAll of these sites are just fancy databases at the heart of them, and all of them match your data with other people's data to try to find a good fit. So it's important that the data be good and useful so that the matches are good and useful.Match.com allows you a couple fields to write a personal statement, as all these sites do. The rest of their fields are really terrible - it asks what your ultimate place to live would be, and then gives you five choices. Well, what if your ultimate place isn't in those five choices? &tc. All their fields are like that. It makes for useless matches. My ex-husband showed up as a match for me there at one point, if that gives you any idea. Best as I could tell, just about all they matched on was geography.uDate is a lot better in this regard. They let YOU choose what fields to match on, and the questions and answers are all on pretty straightforward stuff. How many times a week do you go out? Are you shy or outgoing? &tc. There, you don't have to rely on cryptic questions like "If you were on a desert island what would you want - a flute, a monkey or a beachball?" to determine what your matches will be. And, as I said, if your potential date's level of education is most important to you, you can make that your ultimate match criteria if you want. lavalife.com is somewhere in the middle. One interesting thing they've done is to make 3 different areas, one for dating, one for LT relationships and one for "intimate encounters." That's really useful for avoiding people whose goals are not yours. And it also allows them to customize the data fields for each area - a field about whether you're into sex toys is useful for the intimate encounters section, for example. They are a "pay as you go" site instead of a monthly subscription site, which is attractive to some people as well.Yahoo personals have lots of participants, but lots of drek. I found many more interesting and intelligent men on the other sites I've mentioned.It really is fun to do. If you want to try it, be sure to post a pic of yourself. The pic-less ads/profiles really do generally get overlooked.Mitten
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra