People who online date, how do you choose who you message or respond to

[Cookiesandough]

I’ve been browsing profiles and it’s really got me down how much people lack originality(not saying I’m necessarily an exception).

Most of the profiles are some variation of your run-the-mill “love to laugh, family is important, and want to experience life to the fullest”. What’s left is people trying way too hard, filling their profile with a bunch of non-sequitor and completely irrelevant stuff in some kind of weird flex. It doesn’t say much about them other than that.
 

So typically I choose to reply back based on how attracted I am to their pictures. That hasn’t been working well for me and  I lose interest quickly. I need more substance, I suppose.. Sometimes I’ll reply back if we share an interest, but I’m starting to notice that those interests are almost all we have in common. But these are the only things I see going by. I might as well just eeney meeney miney mo. Maybe there’s something else I’m missing. 

Also, it’s disconcerting how almost everyone seems to respond the SAME  way to the SAME things in my profile. All the messages in my inbox seem to blend together,. I feel bad because there are quite a few who appear to put some effort put into the messages going by their length and how they try to relate to things I’ve written. 

So. Care  to share what is/was your filtering process? Ty

Edited February 19, 2020 by Cookiesandough

[Fletch Lives]

Well I'm a man but I would usually weed out the ones with the red flags. There were very few left to choose from after that.

Oh I should also say that I was in the wrong area, most were not my type. I'll also add that I'm as picky as a Drewish princess!

Edited February 19, 2020 by Fletch Lives

[Cookiesandough]

 

15 minutes ago, Fletch Lives said:

Well I'm a man but I would usually weed out the ones with the red flags. There were very few left to choose from after that.

Oh I should also say that I was in the wrong area, most were not my type. I'll also add that I'm as picky as a Drewish princess!

Haha. What is a red flag? I often think it might be my area? I noticed when I was in Boston for a school thing there were many more men who met my criteria. But I had to leave 😞

 

———————-

I just realized I made an almost exact thread almost exactly a year ago. Things don’t change much huh 😕  I guess this one is kind of pointless since I found some answers there. Never mind. Sorry. 

 

 

Edited February 19, 2020 by Cookiesandough

[nospam99]

Wall o' Text of how I filter Match.com 'recommendations' here (but you can skip that topic and just read below):
https://www.loveshack.org/forums/topic/592171-stupid-match-old-trix/

As a guy, I send more messages than I get sent to me. But I pretty much filter the same whether I send the first message or the woman does. It's rare that a woman writes an interesting first message to me. I can't remember even one. So the content of her profile is my main filter.

For my searches, I filter on age, location, whether or not she's been recently active on the site, and whatever 'match percentage'/score the site uses. The only sites I actively use are Match, PoF, and OKCupid. All three calculate some kind of score.

Once I have some kind of search results, like most folks probably do, I filter on her photos. I plead guilty to being a 'male pig' in that if I am not physically attracted to her I won't read her full profile.

At this point, having checked off her age, location, activity, match score, and looks and read her full profile, I try to assess whether she sounds like she'd be interested in meeting me. I check HER stated age, location, and height preferences to make sure there are no obvious dealbreakers. I read her essay (if there is one - no essay and the rest of the profile has to look good for me to send a message) to get a feel for her character and her list of interests to see what we might enjoy doing together on a date. Key 'common interests' for me include skiing, hiking, dancing, and gardening. Common interests in movies and dining out are okay, but so 'everybody' that they're not good filters. A helpful feature of match.com, my prime OLD tool, is a list of 12 ''what she's looking for' criteria: height, body type, marijuana, cigarettes, alcohol, marital status, children, desire for children, ethnicity, religion, language, and education. I check those criteria and usually will not send a message if there is an obvious dealbreaker, usually height for me. Other dealbreakers I see include smokers (weed or cigs but rare) heavy drinkers (rare) or serious Christians who only want a guy who loves Jesus as much as they do. I also pass on women who write something in their essay of the form of ''don't contact me unless you hate Trump'' (small percentage, but they sound VERY serious about it).

[Interstellar]

I’d message and ask her if she can deadlift her bodyweight, her 2000m row time, and how many strict pushups she can do in ten minutes. I’m totally kidding....only her thoughts on curing world hunger.

[Fletch Lives]

1 hour ago, Cookiesandough said:

 

Haha. What is a red flag? I often think it might be my area? I noticed when I was in Boston for a school thing there were many more men who met my criteria. But I had to leave 😞

 

 

 

 - red flags are clues that suggest a dealbreaker - such as insanity, bad attitude, or major problems.

Actually I'm in a weird area where a high percentage of the people are from another culture.

Edited February 19, 2020 by Fletch Lives

[melonmint57]

I can tell you I definitely don't respond to men who can't seem to form complete sentences or don't know how to spell. As far as profiles, I look for more originality. That tells me someone actually put time into their responses. I also do a lot of filtering based on my non-negotiables. For instance, I don't have kids and don't want them, so by default men with kids or wanting kids are out. To be honest I tend to rule far more men out than I actually communicate with. 

[Cookiesandough]

@nospam99 Glad baiting you into my thread worked. I’m only semi-serious. I  feel like you’re one of the few who puts as much thought into OLD as I do, so I’m glad you came in here to share your thoughts. I read your thread, but felt it was focused on Match? I‘ve never signed up for it.  Maybe I should, althoughI’ve heard men on there seem more focused on finding wives and/or vessels for their progeny. That is fine and makes more sense on a paid site, but not where I am at. Probable I’ll never be there. I do like all the extra features it has. 
 

I’m predominantly using OkCupid because it seems like it could be that spot between POF and Match, but I’m not sure. I have my age set to  32-99, distance set to 50 miles, and it automatically sets it by match %. Those are the only filters I have on right now. I never considered the “last online” filter. Thx. 
 

I just reread my interests and saw  mine were “reading, crafting, succulents, antiques, documentaries, dogs, and the outdoors.” I sound incredibly boring, sheesh. Actually, I sound like someone’s grandmother. I need to revise this. So far, I’ve just stuck ‘pc gaming’ and ‘cosplay’ in there as a quick fix, but I need to work on this more later. 

So do you feel like the way you are filtering is helping you meet women who you click with on a personal level online? Like do you feel chemistry with most of the women you talk to on there? 

I want to mention I also have this fear in the back of my mind, especially after left swiping 10 consecutive times, that I’m going to run out of people. I don’t know if it’s rational or not. Has that happened to you before. 

 

Lol @Interstellar thanks for the gravitas. This is only my life !!!! Also is DLing your body weight even impressive. Pretty sure I can do that and more and  I am pretty weak. 

Edited February 19, 2020 by Cookiesandough

[Cookiesandough]

9 minutes ago, melonmint57 said:

I can tell you I definitely don't respond to men who can't seem to form complete sentences or don't know how to spell. As far as profiles, I look for more originality. That tells me someone actually put time into their responses. I also do a lot of filtering based on my non-negotiables. For instance, I don't have kids and don't want them, so by default men with kids or wanting kids are out. To be honest I tend to rule far more men out than I actually communicate with. 

Ty. Same.  Though  I’m at the point now that maybe, in the right circumstance.   I might respond to in hope he was being  sardonic. Like a warm breeze  of originality in a cold and desolate landscape of clones. That’s so sad, but it’s true. 
 

I am looking for originality as well but I’m so afraid I’m going to run out of profiles 🥴

[Interstellar]

1 hour ago, Cookiesandough said:

@nospam99 Glad baiting you into my thread worked. I’m only semi-serious. I  feel like you’re one of the few who puts as much thought into OLD as I do, so I’m glad you came in here to share your thoughts. I read your thread, but felt it was focused on Match? I‘ve never signed up for it.  Maybe I should, althoughI’ve heard men on there seem more focused on finding wives and/or vessels for their progeny. That is fine and makes more sense on a paid site, but not where I am at. Probable I’ll never be there. I do like all the extra features it has. 
 

I’m predominantly using OkCupid because it seems like it could be that spot between POF and Match, but I’m not sure. I have my age set to  32-99, distance set to 50 miles, and it automatically sets it by match %. Those are the only filters I have on right now. I never considered the “last online” filter. Thx. 
 

I just reread my interests and saw  mine were “reading, crafting, succulents, antiques, documentaries, dogs, and the outdoors.” I sound incredibly boring, sheesh. Actually, I sound like someone’s grandmother. I need to revise this. So far, I’ve just stuck ‘pc gaming’ and ‘cosplay’ in there as a quick fix, but I need to work on this more later. 

So do you feel like the way you are filtering is helping you meet women who you click with on a personal level online? Like do you feel chemistry with most of the women you talk to on there? 

I want to mention I also have this fear in the back of my mind, especially after left swiping 10 consecutive times, that I’m going to run out of people. I don’t know if it’s rational or not. Has that happened to you before. 

 

Lol @Interstellar thanks for the gravitas. This is only my life !!!! Also is DLing your body weight even impressive. Pretty sure I can do that and more and  I am pretty weak. 

Believe in  yourself. You’re a lot stronger and more than capable of anything you set your mind to. You’ll be surprised.

Edited February 19, 2020 by Interstellar

[Cookiesandough]

So as I wrote this I’ve been talking to this guy. I’m going to be honest; I basically just closed my eyes and picked him out the bunch. He’s kind of cute, I guess. We’re having a conversation. But there’s no ‘click’ for me. Nothing there beyond that...

Then he tells me he joined yesterday. He said he’s curious my situation and why I’m on thereZ 
 

I basically just relayed my search for a ‘click’ story, a particular personality I’m searching for that I can’t find anywhere. I didn’t tell him I’m a loner who finds it hard to date people in general.  I asked him what his story was.

 

He asked long or short version. I’m   interested in people, so I told him to tell me the long versions Boy, did he ever. He went through his history, from when he was born, to his relationships, to his last one ending in December 2018. He’s will be finished with school next Monday. He said he talked few people here and there, but nothing really felt right and he wanted to wait until he was done with school and it just goes on and on ....

 

Now don’t get me wrong, I found everything he said interesting on an objective level. I mean, I come here on my own to read this stuff for a hobby. However, how is this kind of conversation supposed to generate interest in going on a first date with him? How is this supposed to increase attraction and a connection on a romantic level vs just a friendly one? It killed everything that was there, which fortunately, was basically nothing. I feel so lost rn 

Edited February 19, 2020 by Cookiesandough

[Fletch Lives]

Okay, the following may seem like a radical statement to you. It's a myth that common interests are important. Let me explain.

Attraction is usually what gets the ball rolling in dating.....if a person is sociable, they should be able to build rapport with a wide variety of people. And if they are flexible, they will be open to new things and perspectives (could they hold a job where they deal with others?). Who does not like a walk on the beach with their honey?! Do you smell what I'm cookin'?!

Additionally, you are not looking for a mate to be your entire world - you should have a balanced life, with your own interests, and friends that you can share some interests.

Finally, if a couple who are reasonable, open-minded, and sociable both sat down and each made a list of 100 things they like to do and compared notes, they can find plenty to do together. Am I makin' sense here, McFly?!

You are not looking for common interests. You are looking for common interest in each other.

People speak to their emotions. When somebody likes somebody, they will say they have common interests. When they are not attracted, they will say they don't have anything in common. Watch people dating and you will see this!

Just look for attraction, and a person who is a good catch - somebody who is sane, has a good attitude, integrity, and not too many problems, or major, dealbreaking problems. That's what's really important.

Another relationship myth busted!

Edited February 19, 2020 by Fletch Lives

[GuitarGuy7]

This is my suggestion for choosing who to message and respond to. 

I would recommend reading the profile page of every guy who has taken the time to send you a personalized message and then look for compatible interests with one another.  For instance, let's just say you like to play music, then you should look for signs in his profile that he is also a musician.  So I think that you should screen for compatible interests because the theory is that you two are more likely to connect if you two have something in common with one another. 

I get that finding your partner attractive is important but maybe relax your standards on looks; instead of only choosing to go out with 6 ft 2 "Chads" who you may have nothing in common with, there are plenty of normal looking men between a 6 and 7 in the looks-scale who you might be more compatible with. 

So a guy messages you on online dating, he's read your profile and sends you a personalized message based on what he has read from your profile. You look at his profile and it's well written and you discover he's a musician as well; he plays guitar and you like to sing. And even though he's not 6 ft tall and handsome, you don't find him ugly either; you would probably rate him a 6/10.  This is the guy who I think that you should choose to go on a date with. 

 

[Cookiesandough]

Thank you, @Fletch Lives and @GuitarGuy7 ,for the advice

 

Ive never been attracted to “chads”(Nothing against them, just not my type) But I will stop selecting guys by any kind of physical  attraction because there’s rarely any personality click there especially when meet in person anyway. I was just doing that no one really has anything else that makes them stand out. Lately, I have just been scanning profile of  everyone indiscriminately even though I can usually tell in the first sentence or so if we will not be a match. I’ll continue to do this until I find a better system 

Edited February 19, 2020 by Cookiesandough

[Fletch Lives]

Well, you laughed at my Drewish princess joke.......a lot of women love humor, maybe you want a humorous guy.

[chillii]

Back in the day l found nearly all the women identical too and they actually all mostly said those exact things you wrote.l could not believe how boring they sounded just clone after clone. l never looked at the guys but it really surprises me you've said they're scribbling the same bs too.

Me , l'm very different and l go for very different so unless l caught something special in her face apart from , l use to flick through the 100s of clones in seconds, didn't even bother stopping they were so spottable and predictable.To me the only way was to know what you want and look for that. Which in my case was a very small few among 1000s, but that was fine with me.

But eh , didn't l see somewhere you were only looking for casual anyway ,  so does it even matter.

[nospam99]

@cookies...

As an 'aside' that is pertinent to your OLD experience, based on the avatar photos you cycle through here on LS, you fall into the category of 'attractive young woman'. That is just flat out OLD contact bait. A lot will depend on the photos you choose to post in your OLD profiles(s). But I'd be surprised if you don't receive a lot of contacts to cull. LOL because for me dog photos are also contact bait (deer photos are not :p ) - can't speak for other guys or the younger guys who should be in your dating demographic.

I'm going to respond, more or less point by point, to your response to me.

You're right about me putting thought into OLD. I find OLD fascinating, frustrating, and even sometimes useful. But in the last few months I have come around more and more to my need to find 'real-life' ways to try to meet women.

The thread I posted a link to was indeed focused on Match. Not only on Match, but on a particular feature currently called 'Discover', which is useful but could be a lot more useful. I wrote 'more here in your topic because my Discover tactics are a very incomplete answer to your question about filtering. I focus on Match because, in my demographic, 'new blood' is MUCH more likely to surface in Match compared to PoF or OKC.

If OKC works for you, good for you. The problem I have with OKC, aside from rare new blood, is that their messaging rules make it difficult for me to know whether women I"ve contacted there have even read my message. On Match I can tell if a woman has never read my message. So I can send a second message if I think she's a 'really good' match and I sometimes get a response on a 'retry'.

Your point about men having different focus on different OLD sites is valid. I only know what type of relationship I'm focused on. Me as a sample of one means little. Guys in your demographic on Match might or might not be focused on finding wives. You might want to throw the $40 or whatever it is at Match for a one month subscription. It would at least give you a chance to 'look around' at the men there. But don't be surprised if a lot of them are the same guys you're seeing now on OKC.

Yes, your list of interests is heavy on things that a person does alone. I think interests that are things a couple can do on a date are better filters. Dogs and outdoors sound good to me. I suggest you elaborate on what you like to do outdoors. Cosplay? LOL! I don't do cosplay. But, as a table-top RPG player, I've seen some dayum sexy costumes at cons - think Night Bitch from Kick-Ass 2 :D

I think that my filtering is culling OUT women who I wouldn't enjoy spending time with. Chemisty? LOL again because to me 'chemistry' and 'spark' mean sexual attraction. Because I filter on character and values, almost all of the OLD women I've met have been both fun to talk to and honest about their appearance in their profiles. And because I also filter on appearance, almost all of them have 'pushed my chemistry button'. So, yes, I think my filtering has been effective.

I can relate to 'running out of people'. Because of the way the OLD sites present what they think (no thought really involved - just computer algorithms) I'm interested in, I often left swipe WAY more than 10 consecutive times. I think I've been post-divorce dating long enough that the only potential matches are new blood. It's not something I fear, just acknowledge.

[SumGuy]

I look at it all in totality.   I'll always look at the profile of a woman who messages or likes me, no matter the lead picture; figure owe everyone who takes a chance at least that much.

I used to respond back to everyone even if they weren't for me, just to thank them and say so.  Not anymore.

I first filter (or filtered as have been off for a bit as found someone via OLD) on distance, if they are more than half an hour away there need to be some major wow factor in all respects.  Anything more than an hour is impossible.

I then filtered  based primarily on world view/philosophy and together with looks but will say a profile will supersede looks for me, that is if the profile impresses me I'll meet and see.  I've a pretty wide range in what does it for me in the looks department.

Looking for someone who shares the same approach to life is everything for me.  What someone is looking for and how they express it is important to me.  Also music liked and books reading / last read I found provides some good insight.   I used Match so there are fields for this info, if not there it is often what I ask in messaging. 

I have my "red flags" that say very unlikely we'll see eye to eye, and things that say much more likely it will work.  It seemed to work very well.

A short profile is generally not going to do it for me, the few times I ignored that "filter" it didn't work out.   A "wall of text" is no issue if it is laid out well, frankly even if it isn't well laid out.

 

 

 

Edited February 19, 2020 by SumGuy

[d0nnivain]

Remember I haven't been on OLD in more then 15 years & I was only there for a short unsuccessful time. 

First I looked that the pictures to see if I was attracted.  Then I read what they said.  If there were no original thoughts I did not contact them. 

If the man contacted me, I tried not to be superficial.  If I liked what he had to say I responded.  That got me dates with socially inept men I wasn't attracted to because I didn't want to be rude & reject them for looks alone.   After that I got off OLD for good & never looked back.  

[Legatus]

9 hours ago, Fletch Lives said:

Okay, the following may seem like a radical statement to you. It's a myth that common interests are important. Let me explain.

 

I could not agree more. It's not about common interests but also common approach to them.

I can get attracted to a person who has completely opposite interests but if they're passionate about it and put an effort, it already tells me a lot about them. Not only I will still be interested in listening to them talk about their passion, maybe even watch, perhaps even try it just for fun, but also I know that they have that kind of passion. 

[elaine567]

14 hours ago, Cookiesandough said:

Also, it’s disconcerting how almost everyone seems to respond the SAME  way to the SAME things in my profile. All the messages in my inbox seem to blend together,. I feel bad because there are quite a few who appear to put some effort put into the messages going by their length and how they try to relate to things I’ve written. 

But if you are looking for a long term partner, why do their initial messages have to "stand out" as being "different"?
Isn't "normal" enough?
 

[Cookiesandough]

I’m not sure I’m looking for a long term partner. I don’t know if it fits my situation,. But either way I am mostly attracted to interesting men. I lose interest quick enough at it is. . I can’t get into someone who is bores me, which is usually what it means when the first messages are unoriginal...

Edited February 19, 2020 by Cookiesandough

[Fletch Lives]

I think online dating can it can be hard for women.......it takes time for them to become interested in a guy, they have to get to know him, and it's hard to get to know someone over the phone lines/net.

[Cookiesandough]

56 minutes ago, Fletch Lives said:

I think online dating can it can be hard for women.......it takes time for them to become interested in a guy, they have to get to know him, and it's hard to get to know someone over the phone lines/net.

Yea.... I’m gonna disables my profile and take a short break. This is all starting to make me feel down. Thanks to all who shared their thoughts 

[vla1120]

Six or more years ago, when I was using OLD, I remember getting frustrated because of how many men sent inappropriate messages, etc., and were clearly not looking for a meaningful relationship, or I would get the guy who would tell me he makes enough money that he can be "picky" and I was either too old for him, or I had a few too many pounds extra (and I wasn't even overweight!) I got so frustrated that I changed my entire profile. I think the first sentence was something like "I may not be Angelina Jolie, but I guarantee you're no Brad Pitt, either." I got more responses from that comment than from any other section of my profile. 😂