OLD & warm up before meeting

[lana-banana]

MBTI is basically astrology for the workplace. It's not legitimate science and it has no empirical basis (see the studies in which people take the tests twice in a row and receive wildly different results). It's no more sound than a BuzzFeed quiz, and is popular for the same reason: people like to believe things about themselves. It's nice to think the weirdness of your personality can be explained as a "type" or a formula. Ubiquity does not equal validity. Hell, government and police academies still use polygraphs even though there's no scientific basis for those either.

 

Gaeta again has the right idea inasmuch as online dating should just be a means of meeting people you wouldn't meet otherwise. There is nothing unattractive or unfeminine about sending the first message. If the date doesn't work out, oh well. It could still be a valuable connection. I know multiple couples who have met through the friends of people they met online! I personally have two male friends who I went on dates with, mutually realized there was no romantic interest, but continued to hang out with at parties and such. It never hurts to network.

 

Seriously though, if you approach each date as an audition to meet The One you will drop dead of stress. If you think of it as a chance to have some coffee and continue an interesting conversation, you'll be far more relaxed.

[No_Go]

Regarding MBTI I need to research before expressing opinion.

 

However, regarding Gaeta's and your's take on OLD - I politely disagree. I just can't connect for the world over coffee or any 'laid-back' type of atmosphere. If the guy takes me out for a wild nature walk - a little more likely to connect The same stands for me for guys that I've met IRL. Unless they take the time for some meaningful correspondence or non-casual conversation, they can be the hottest thing in the world, I'd never notice them.

 

I have no idea why is that, I think it is because I'm not visual. I notice at best the general outline and coloring, not that my vision is bad - my brain scatters when I'm talking to stranger so I don't remember features at all. I hope this makes sense. Also humorous or flirtatious types instantly make me withdraw and detach. I love some dry humor later on, but not on first meets (and I can never stand flirting... if they can skip it all together, great).

 

I'm not going for the One because I don't believe in the concept I honestly just look for a guy that fits my life / lifestyle + have good sexual chemistry with & good conversational partner. It is that simple for me Maybe because I'm getting old I just don't believe in love stories and matches anymore. If someone proves me wrong - cool, but it is not a goal for me.

 

First messages - I don't think it is unattractive thing in principle, but I have never chased a guy, so it is so weird to me... I think if the guy finds me attractive and it is not totally passive or awkward, he'd have the guts to approach me first. For the same reason I've never initiated a kiss, relationship talk, anything relationship wise really... Well, this time around I may consider changes, but I'm still scared to get a passive dude that I need to push (big turnoff for me personally) or someone lukewarm (who will just respond hoping to get sex) if i initiate.

 

Gaeta again has the right idea inasmuch as online dating should just be a means of meeting people you wouldn't meet otherwise. There is nothing unattractive or unfeminine about sending the first message. If the date doesn't work out, oh well. It could still be a valuable connection. I know multiple couples who have met through the friends of people they met online! I personally have two male friends who I went on dates with, mutually realized there was no romantic interest, but continued to hang out with at parties and such. It never hurts to network.

 

Seriously though, if you approach each date as an audition to meet The One you will drop dead of stress. If you think of it as a chance to have some coffee and continue an interesting conversation, you'll be far more relaxed.

[SevenCity]

MBTI is basically astrology for the workplace. It's not legitimate science and it has no empirical basis (see the studies in which people take the tests twice in a row and receive wildly different results). It's no more sound than a BuzzFeed quiz, and is popular for the same reason: people like to believe things about themselves. It's nice to think the weirdness of your personality can be explained as a "type" or a formula. Ubiquity does not equal validity. Hell, government and police academies still use polygraphs even though there's no scientific basis for those either.

 

Gaeta again has the right idea inasmuch as online dating should just be a means of meeting people you wouldn't meet otherwise. There is nothing unattractive or unfeminine about sending the first message. If the date doesn't work out, oh well. It could still be a valuable connection. I know multiple couples who have met through the friends of people they met online! I personally have two male friends who I went on dates with, mutually realized there was no romantic interest, but continued to hang out with at parties and such. It never hurts to network.

 

Seriously though, if you approach each date as an audition to meet The One you will drop dead of stress. If you think of it as a chance to have some coffee and continue an interesting conversation, you'll be far more relaxed.

 

I couldn't agree more with this. I've made the mistake of long exchanges and was always disappointed. Either because she was not how I pictured or it fizzled out. I exchange 2-3 messages and ask her out. I don't waste any time and have had higher success with this method.

 

With all due respect No-Go, you better be insanely hot to have this list of demands. Most guys online are playing a numbers game and will put in minimal effort until there is a date. You will come across as a time waster or lookie loo. Guys experience WAY to much of this online to put up with it for long. It's not AOL, it's OLD

 

No personality test or online exchange is going to measure up to 15 seconds in person. You meet people in real life so why should this be any different? Just meet for a drink and you will know more in 10 minutes than exchanging messages for a week. I don't see how this is any different than talking to a guy at the supermarket.

[Popsicle]

Just put your profile up and see how it goes. This is already too much mental masturbation.

[JuneL]

I also think it's a waste of time to exchange long emails. People can write an epic story about themselves, but sometimes one's body language conveys much more about the person.

 

OP: You have mentioned in another thread that you had the tendency to take the first guy you met as your boyfriend (and have been conned that way). Do you think such outcomes might have to do with your engaging in long email exchanges first?

[No_Go]

OP: You have mentioned in another thread that you had the tendency to take the first guy you met as your boyfriend (and have been conned that way). Do you think such outcomes might have to do with your engaging in long email exchanges first?

 

No, I think it has to do with my general unwillingness to date (I just don't enjoy it) and trying to shortcut to a relationship. That's why I was thinking to slow down things a bit with longer correspondence.

[No_Go]

Just put your profile up and see how it goes. This is already too much mental masturbation.

 

As said I'll put the profile up by next Wednesday I'll report then. Btw the mental masturbation appeals to me, maybe the issue lies there.

[No_Go]

Ugh that's exactly what i'm trying to avoid - guy clicking on 50 different profiles simultaneously. I understand for men it is harder to land on a date, but why not focus on one person at a time, what is the rush for?

 

I don't know what would be considered insanely hot but look wise I'm a type that most guys would consider attractive (height weight proportionate, long hair, feminine style etc). So I'm not worried about that. I'm actually purposefully downplaying on looks in my profile pics (I mean no skin showing etc) - to weed out guys looking for just that. Maybe not my smartest move thinking about it...

 

I couldn't agree more with this. I've made the mistake of long exchanges and was always disappointed. Either because she was not how I pictured or it fizzled out. I exchange 2-3 messages and ask her out. I don't waste any time and have had higher success with this method.

 

With all due respect No-Go, you better be insanely hot to have this list of demands. Most guys online are playing a numbers game and will put in minimal effort until there is a date. You will come across as a time waster or lookie loo. Guys experience WAY to much of this online to put up with it for long. It's not AOL, it's OLD

 

No personality test or online exchange is going to measure up to 15 seconds in person. You meet people in real life so why should this be any different? Just meet for a drink and you will know more in 10 minutes than exchanging messages for a week. I don't see how this is any different than talking to a guy at the supermarket.

[coolheadal]

I'm thinking it is about time to get back into OLD... I took 9 months after my LDR, albeit there were several relapses with him.. now it is truly done.

 

I have one issue with OLD though - I absolutely can't connect without an extensive written exchange before the first meet. I know many guys are told to meet first before getting invested - well, for me that's a certain no-go because I just do not develop romantic interest that way (for the same reason cold approach IRL is not working for me at all).

 

Would it be weird to put it as a part of my profile that I prefer to warm up with some written exchanges (not 'Hey how was your day' but something substantial) or this will make my prospects run away ?

 

(Just to clarify: my pictures will be from 30 days so there will be no surprises on date 1... and for my own information the parameters - height, weight, age etc- is all I need to know for my prospective date in the beginning, I literally can't remember visuals at all so I don't even bother)

 

Stick up 3 pictures of yourself, smile in two and have one with a serious look. One standing pose. The rest just say who you are and what you expect and then what you want and that's it. No need to go full circle here. Just be you. I am off the OLD for now until I am ready to even think to go back on there. Try not get out of control on this OLD stuff your there for a purpose your there for find love not to chase it away! If your a MS COLD FISH type then your going to have a problem with healthy ego partners.

[No_Go]

If your a MS COLD FISH type then your going to have a problem with healthy ego partners.

 

LMAO - what would Ms Cold Fish represent? I'm just not willing to meet 50 men - the few that I'd meet I'd be more then willing to move forward with quickly - I'm not looking for buddies in dating sites

[coolheadal]

LMAO - what would Ms Cold Fish represent? I'm just not willing to meet 50 men - the few that I'd meet I'd be more then willing to move forward with quickly - I'm not looking for buddies in dating sites

 

My dear that was just example, but what you said here you have some of us confused. I look at things a different way. I am not like the norm. I feel life has better things to offer, fun, being playful and enjoy what love and romance is all about. I don't follow the rules of the game. Why are games if you just looking for love in all the wrong places. Looking for love in to many places. Yeah sounds like that song so what I can sing! LOL

[Eternal Sunshine]

Mental masturbation appeals to me too! I think it's the main difference between "S" and "N" people. I am an INFP and have never connected with an "S" person.

 

I tried to play the numbers game with OLD - meeting quickly and trying to give chances to wide variety of men. It just wasn't me. I hate dating, I was never excited about meeting complete strangers and would often just cancel because I dreaded it so much. I am also incapable of feeling anything based on just looks or small talk. If I ever try OLD again, I will go slow.

 

This is what I learned from my previous approach:

 

1. Playing the numbers game and multi-dating left me depressed, negative and drained. Mostly because I am simply not wired to feel a connection that way.

 

2. If I felt no connection through text/chat - it only got worse in person.

 

3. If I felt some connection through text/chat - sometimes it translated in person, sometimes not. But at least it's a start.

 

4. If I met men that are outside of my preferred parameters (I like educated, white collar workers for example, within 5 years of my age) - I had the most awful dates. Some of these men were physically very good looking but we had nothing in common and such different lifestyles and perceptions of the world. Even an hour long coffee date left us running out of conversation.

 

5. Men that are very confident, flirty and smooth were always a turn off. I prefer a bit shy and sensitive.

 

6. The less we talked before the date, the more likely the guy is to blatantly try to invite me over for sex

 

Ah how I long for times when most people were single and I could meet single men my age through work, school or normal activities. I could get to know them slowly and only go on a first date if I am already strongly interested. How exciting those dates were!

[salparadise]

MBTI is basically astrology for the workplace. It's not legitimate science and it has no empirical basis (see the studies in which people take the tests twice in a row and receive wildly different results).

 

We sort objects by size, weight, color, texture, material and many other properties. But when it comes to sorting humans by personality characteristics, all of a sudden we have a subset vehemently opposed and denying that it's even possible. What they're saying is, I don't want to be sorted because I'm afraid that it diminishes my individuality, or makes me less valuable somehow. It's like refusing to step on the scales because you'd rather not know how much you weigh. And then rationalizing the strategy of avoidance by denying that weight is even a thing.

[No_Go]

I can relate with most of your post to the T. Especially 1-3. I despise the numbers approach. I never ever multi-dated, I'm usually giving at minimum a week between dates with different people (I think I totaled 8 men from OLD, resulting in 2 LTRs and 1 shorter term... it doesn't need to be 1/100 rl/dates ratio...)

 

I never seriously thought about S/N but it may explain some experiences...

 

I just don't think it is OLD problem, say if you meet a man IRL under similar forced circumstances (like a blind date arranged by a friend), isn't it the same?

 

Mental masturbation appeals to me too! I think it's the main difference between "S" and "N" people. I am an INFP and have never connected with an "S" person.

 

I tried to play the numbers game with OLD - meeting quickly and trying to give chances to wide variety of men. It just wasn't me. I hate dating, I was never excited about meeting complete strangers and would often just cancel because I dreaded it so much. I am also incapable of feeling anything based on just looks or small talk. If I ever try OLD again, I will go slow.

 

This is what I learned from my previous approach:

 

1. Playing the numbers game and multi-dating left me depressed, negative and drained. Mostly because I am simply not wired to feel a connection that way.

 

2. If I felt no connection through text/chat - it only got worse in person.

 

3. If I felt some connection through text/chat - sometimes it translated in person, sometimes not. But at least it's a start.

 

4. If I met men that are outside of my preferred parameters (I like educated, white collar workers for example, within 5 years of my age) - I had the most awful dates. Some of these men were physically very good looking but we had nothing in common and such different lifestyles and perceptions of the world. Even an hour long coffee date left us running out of conversation.

 

5. Men that are very confident, flirty and smooth were always a turn off. I prefer a bit shy and sensitive.

 

6. The less we talked before the date, the more likely the guy is to blatantly try to invite me over for sex

 

Ah how I long for times when most people were single and I could meet single men my age through work, school or normal activities. I could get to know them slowly and only go on a first date if I am already strongly interested. How exciting those dates were!

[lana-banana]

Ugh that's exactly what i'm trying to avoid - guy clicking on 50 different profiles simultaneously. I understand for men it is harder to land on a date, but why not focus on one person at a time, what is the rush for?

 

If you are trying to avoid this, online dating isn't for you. Everyone on an online dating site is clicking 50 profiles simultaneously; that's how it works. OKCupid gives users 3-10 new matches per day, and allows you to search for as many others as you want. Online dating is a numbers game because if you went one by one you would never actually go on dates.

 

Why would you focus on one person at a time before you've even met them? If you saw a beautiful and inriguing house on Redfin, would you put all your time and energy into crafting a winning offer, or would you go to see the house first to be sure it was actually worth the trouble?

 

Think of what you're asking from the other person's perspective: "I need you to spend at least a week composing long, thoughtful and intelligent messages before I even agree to see you, at which point we must meet for a special, unique and formal date." If someone asked that of you, what would you say? You're asking them to invest literally hours of their time before they even know if they find you attractive. This is a hard sell, especially at your age. By the time most people (male and female) hit their 30s, they have an established, often busy life and comfortable routine. They have also been on enough first dates to know that 70% of them don't lead to second dates. Who wants to invest all that time, energy and possibly money for such a long shot?

 

Guys who prefer to write long letters will write you letters whether you put it on your profile or not. By explicitly stating "I need X, Y and Z or else" you may come off as high-maintenance to men who would otherwise be interested. Saying "I like to go for walks in the park" or "I like creative first dates" will yield much better results than "You must meet these standards".

 

I remember exchanging a lot of really smart, funny emails with one particular fellow. We had such a great written rapport and his profile was everything I wanted in a man, but within ten seconds of meeting I knew it was a waste of time. All our intellectual chemistry just didn't matter. I felt zero desire whatsoever. Meanwhile with my husband (ugh, so weird, gonna keep saying "fiancé" until the wedding party) we had chemistry instantly. But I didn't meet him online, either. Had I seen him on an online dating website I would have filtered him right out. There's just so much you don't know until you meet face-to-face.

 

Nobody enjoys dating. It's terrible. But if you are this averse to the process you may be better served by a matchmaker. You typically pay a couple hundred bucks per match or a couple grand for an annual subscription. I never tried it, but I strongly considered it at one point and people who have done it seem happy.

[No_Go]

I'd love to learn more about psychometrics to make an informed opinion,

but one thing that you said and I 100% agree - people just fear to be sorted... I never understood why. Nobody is offended if we say they have brown eyes or blue eyes (noting the eye coloring is not binary as well obviously but nobody objects) but when it comes to personalities, intelligence etc - there is a rage! All-inclusiveness, equality sounds great for political purposes, not so much for biology/evolution...

 

We sort objects by size, weight, color, texture, material and many other properties. But when it comes to sorting humans by personality characteristics, all of a sudden we have a subset vehemently opposed and denying that it's even possible. What they're saying is, I don't want to be sorted because I'm afraid that it diminishes my individuality, or makes me less valuable somehow. It's like refusing to step on the scales because you'd rather not know how much you weigh. And then rationalizing the strategy of avoidance by denying that weight is even a thing.

[lana-banana]

We sort objects by size, weight, color, texture, material and many other properties. But when it comes to sorting humans by personality characteristics, all of a sudden we have a subset vehemently opposed and denying that it's even possible. What they're saying is, I don't want to be sorted because I'm afraid that it diminishes my individuality, or makes me less valuable somehow. It's like refusing to step on the scales because you'd rather not know how much you weigh. And then rationalizing the strategy of avoidance by denying that weight is even a thing.

 

My opposition to the MBTI isn't because I don't like being sorted or have issues with my individuality, it's because it's pseudoscience. By contrast, the MMPI-2 is an incredibly useful tool for understanding someone's personality, ideas and ambitions. Plenty of solid tools for clustering traits and types of people exist, but the MBTI is not one of them.

[No_Go]

I was considering matchmakers but I don't know any reputable services in my area. If I find one I'll give it a shot.

 

I never understood why people have such a low success in getting 2nd dates. In my personal experience, if I agree on a first one [after some research], there is 95% chance to have a second one. The 5% I'm leaving for people that intentionally misrepresented themselves.

 

Especially older people - if you're 25+, you likely know your dealbreakers and types very well - why then not select people that you feel have high potential only, and avoid going to 50 dates... Writing is so much easier than meeting in person... I just can't imagine middle aged (25-50) professional adults having the time and energy to run to freaking dates in coffee shops around the town, when they can get the same information using just their laptop on the way to work, while cooking dinner, or lying in bed.

 

With the houses - if they could write me e-mails, I'd not be visiting 12 a week. But jokes aside - if I'm going on a date I'm taking it dead serious. I am giving the possibility to have physical intimacy a high chance and I feel extremely uncomfortable to do this with multiple people in a week (I'm not talking sex only - even just a kiss - I somehow limited the men that I kissed in my lifetime to 4, because of this dating pre-selection approach; without physical stuff I can't determine chemistry, so I don't see a point to not do it if we indeed feel comfortable enough meeting).

 

If you are trying to avoid this, online dating isn't for you. Everyone on an online dating site is clicking 50 profiles simultaneously; that's how it works. OKCupid gives users 3-10 new matches per day, and allows you to search for as many others as you want. Online dating is a numbers game because if you went one by one you would never actually go on dates.

 

Why would you focus on one person at a time before you've even met them? If you saw a beautiful and inriguing house on Redfin, would you put all your time and energy into crafting a winning offer, or would you go to see the house first to be sure it was actually worth the trouble?

 

Think of what you're asking from the other person's perspective: "I need you to spend at least a week composing long, thoughtful and intelligent messages before I even agree to see you, at which point we must meet for a special, unique and formal date." If someone asked that of you, what would you say? You're asking them to invest literally hours of their time before they even know if they find you attractive. This is a hard sell, especially at your age. By the time most people (male and female) hit their 30s, they have an established, often busy life and comfortable routine. They have also been on enough first dates to know that 70% of them don't lead to second dates. Who wants to invest all that time, energy and possibly money for such a long shot?

 

Guys who prefer to write long letters will write you letters whether you put it on your profile or not. By explicitly stating "I need X, Y and Z or else" you may come off as high-maintenance to men who would otherwise be interested. Saying "I like to go for walks in the park" or "I like creative first dates" will yield much better results than "You must meet these standards".

 

I remember exchanging a lot of really smart, funny emails with one particular fellow. We had such a great written rapport and his profile was everything I wanted in a man, but within ten seconds of meeting I knew it was a waste of time. All our intellectual chemistry just didn't matter. I felt zero desire whatsoever. Meanwhile with my husband (ugh, so weird, gonna keep saying "fiancé" until the wedding party) we had chemistry instantly. But I didn't meet him online, either. Had I seen him on an online dating website I would have filtered him right out. There's just so much you don't know until you meet face-to-face.

 

Nobody enjoys dating. It's terrible. But if you are this averse to the process you may be better served by a matchmaker. You typically pay a couple hundred bucks per match or a couple grand for an annual subscription. I never tried it, but I strongly considered it at one point and people who have done it seem happy.

[No_Go]

Isn't MMPI-2 used in clinical psychology as a tool to assess mental health issues? I'm sure it is a good tool for that, but wouldn't it be an overkill for dating purposes? MBTI, again not arguing about accuracy, is attractive to me with its simplicity. If there is a simple clinical psychology test I'd be curious to do it and use it on my potential mating matches.

 

My opposition to the MBTI isn't because I don't like being sorted or have issues with my individuality, it's because it's pseudoscience. By contrast, the MMPI-2 is an incredibly useful tool for understanding someone's personality, ideas and ambitions. Plenty of solid tools for clustering traits and types of people exist, but the MBTI is not one of them.

[lana-banana]

... I just can't imagine middle aged (25-50) professional adults having the time and energy to run to freaking dates in coffee shops around the town, when they can get the same information using just their laptop on the way to work, while cooking dinner, or lying in bed.

 

This is just it: it's *not* the same information. No amount of letters can tell if I feel physically at ease and attracted to you. It takes less than a minute of in-person contact to determine that. You could spend hours, days, even weeks crafting letters but none of it matters if you don't actually click.

[lana-banana]

The MMPI-2 is used to evaluate people, period. It not only diagnoses mental health conditions but also reveals traits like introversion, curiosity, sociopathy, guilt, and so forth. It costs hundreds of dollars to administer and for good reason: it works.

 

There is no even remotely valid reputable or comprehensive free test you can use with a dating partner, because people will always be able or incentivized to give inaccurate answers (the MMPI-2 is one of the few tests that can actually accurately detect deception). If you ask your partner what MBTI type he is, he could very well be lying, making it up, using results from years ago, and so on.

 

Clinical psychology is not going to give you the answers you want. There is no "simple" way to evaluate anyone psychologically, and you are not going to be able to weed out traits you don't like based on any free test results. At the end of the day you're better off with three words: trust but verify.

Edited July 7, 2017 by lana-banana

[SevenCity]

Ugh that's exactly what i'm trying to avoid - guy clicking on 50 different profiles simultaneously. I understand for men it is harder to land on a date, but why not focus on one person at a time, what is the rush for?

I don't know what would be considered insanely hot but look wise I'm a type that most guys would consider attractive (height weight proportionate, long hair, feminine style etc). So I'm not worried about that. I'm actually purposefully downplaying on looks in my profile pics (I mean no skin showing etc) - to weed out guys looking for just that. Maybe not my smartest move thinking about it...

 

There are some guys who focus in on one girl but I think there are few because it is not very successful. You have to understand how OLD is for a guy vs. a woman....

 

Women get inundated with messages, of which you (as a guy) are only one. The chances of her reading it are slim unless you have movie star looks or say something really clever / witty (the latter is negated if she finds you unattractive). As a guy you can literally send out hundreds of messages and only get a 2% - 3% response rate.

 

Of those who respond, most will fizzle out. You will go on dates with a few of them and most guys struggle to get to a second date. So it becomes a numbers game. Once you experience the rejection you begin to care much less and send out feelers to see if you get a response. Sometimes you even forget sending a girl a message because you've been forced to care a lot less.

 

I've been fairly successful with OLD despite my profile pics looking terrible (every women I met said I looked much better than my pics - really got to address that). I usually have no issues getting a second date and had my weekends mostly booked when I was on OLD. But it was due to the volume of messages I sent.

 

Initially I started trying to develop a rapport with them and it usually fizzled. A poster here pointed out that while I was trying to get to know them and speak on the phone, there were 20 other guys asking them out for a drink. I changed my approach and was much more successful as a result.

 

It's not so much rushing, it's playing by the rules.

[No_Go]

This is just it: it's *not* the same information. No amount of letters can tell if I feel physically at ease and attracted to you. It takes less than a minute of in-person contact to determine that. You could spend hours, days, even weeks crafting letters but none of it matters if you don't actually click.

 

I personally had a negative experience after establishing good written rapport exactly once in my lifetime - and it was because I intentionally ignored the pictures because we're a good match otherwise...

[No_Go]

I just don't get it why it would be more difficult to evaluate personality traits then say physical traits or intelligence. Is it just the deception factor or I'm missing something here? I'm not picking at this, I'm simply not getting it.

 

Say MMPI-2 works. Then why not someone just compile a simple model based on it to follow 2-5 traits relevant for mating? I'm sure companies like Match or OKC would have benefited greatly from such a model...

 

The MMPI-2 is used to evaluate people, period. It not only diagnoses mental health conditions but also reveals traits like introversion, curiosity, sociopathy, guilt, and so forth. It costs hundreds of dollars to administer and for good reason: it works.

 

There is no even remotely valid reputable or comprehensive free test you can use with a dating partner, because people will always be able or incentivized to give inaccurate answers (the MMPI-2 is one of the few tests that can actually accurately detect deception). If you ask your partner what MBTI type he is, he could very well be lying, making it up, using results from years ago, and so on.

 

Clinical psychology is not going to give you the answers you want. There is no "simple" way to evaluate anyone psychologically, and you are not going to be able to weed out traits you don't like based on any free test results. At the end of the day you're better off with three words: trust but verify.

[JuneL]

OP: Did many guys disappear after you tried to have long email exchanges with them? So maybe the ones left were those without options.