I’m the first to admit it: we might be popular, we might create a lot of great relationships, we might blah blah blah. But OkCupid doesn’t really know what it’s doing. Neither does any other website. It’s not like people have been building these things for very long, or you can go look up a blueprint or something. Most ideas are bad. Even good ideas could be better. Experiments are how you sort all this out. Like this young buck, trying to get a potato to cry.

We noticed recently that people didn’t like it when Facebook “experimented” with their news feed. Even the FTC is getting involved. But guess what, everybody: if you use the Internet, you’re the subject of hundreds of experiments at any given time, on every site. That’s how websites work.
Here are a few of the more interesting experiments OkCupid has run.
Experiment 1: LOVE IS BLIND, OR SHOULD BE
OkCupid’s ten-year history has been the epitome of the old saying: two steps forward, one total fiasco. A while ago, we had the genius idea of an app that set up blind dates; we spent a year and a half on it, and it was gone from the app store in six months.
Of course, being geniuses, we chose to celebrate the app’s release by removing all the pictures from OkCupid on launch day. “Love Is Blind Day” on OkCupid—January 15, 2013.
All our site metrics were way down during the “celebration”, for example:
But by comparing Love Is Blind Day to a normal Tuesday, we learned some very interesting things. In those 7 hours without photos:
And it wasn’t that “looks weren’t important” to the users who’d chosen to stick around. When the photos were restored at 4PM, 2,200 people were in the middle of conversations that had started “blind”. Those conversations melted away. The goodness was gone, in fact worse than gone. It was like we’d turned on the bright lights at the bar at midnight.
This whole episode made me curious, so I went and looked up the data for the people who had actually used the blind date app. I found a similar thing: once they got to the date, they had a good time more or less regardless of how good-looking their partner was. Here’s the female side of the experience (the male is very similar).
Oddly, it appears that having a better-looking blind date made women slightly less happy—my operating theory is that hotter guys were assholes more often. Anyhow, the fascinating thing is the online reaction of those exact same women was just as judgmental as everyone else’s:
Basically, people are exactly as shallow as their technology allows them to be.
Experiment 2: SO WHAT’S A PICTURE WORTH?
All dating sites let users rate profiles, and OkCupid’s original system gave people two separate scales for judging each other, “personality” and “looks.”
I found this old screenshot. The “loading” icon over the picture pretty much sums up our first four years. Anyhow, here’s the vote system:
Our thinking was that a person might not be classically gorgeous or handsome but could still be cool, and we wanted to recognize that, which just goes to show that when OkCupid started out, the only thing with more bugs than our HTML was our understanding of human nature.
Here’s some data I dug up from the backup tapes. Each dot here is a person. The two scores are within a half point of each other for 92% of the sample after just 25 votes (and that percentage approaches 100% as vote totals get higher).
In short, according to our users, “looks” and “personality” were the same thing, which of course makes perfect sense because, you know, this young female account holder, with a 99th percentile personality:

…and whose profile, by the way, contained no text, is just so obviously a really cool person to hang out and talk to and clutch driftwood with.
After we got rid of the two scales, and replaced it with just one, we ran a direct experiment to confirm our hunch—that people just look at the picture. We took a small sample of users and half the time we showed them, we hid their profile text. That generated two independent sets of scores for each profile, one score for “the picture and the text together” and one for “the picture alone.” Here’s how they compare. Again, each dot is a user. Essentially, the text is less than 10% of what people think of you.
So, your picture is worth that fabled thousand words, but your actual words are worth…almost nothing.
Experiment 3: THE POWER OF SUGGESTION
The ultimate question at OkCupid is, does this thing even work? By all our internal measures, the “match percentage” we calculate for users is very good at predicting relationships. It correlates with message success, conversation length, whether people actually exchange contact information, and so on. But in the back of our minds, there’s always been the possibility: maybe it works just because we tell people it does. Maybe people just like each other because they think they’re supposed to? Like how Jay-Z still sells albums?
To test this, we took pairs of bad matches (actual 30% match) and told them they were exceptionally good for each other (displaying a 90% match.)† Not surprisingly, the users sent more first messages when we said they were compatible. After all, that’s what the site teaches you to do.
But we took the analysis one step deeper. We asked: does the displayed match percentage cause more than just that first message—does the mere suggestion cause people to actually like each other? As far as we can measure, yes, it does.
When we tell people they are a good match, they act as if they are. Even when they should be wrong for each other.
The four-message threshold is our internal measure for a real conversation. And though the data is noisier, this same “higher display means more success” pattern seems to hold when you look at contact information exchanges, too.
This got us worried—maybe our matching algorithm was just garbage and it’s only the power of suggestion that brings people together. So we tested things the other way, too: we told people who were actually good for each other, that they were bad, and watched what happened.
Here’s the whole scope of results (I’m using the odds of exchanging four messages number here):
As you can see, the ideal situation is the lower right: to both be told you’re a good match, and at the same time actually be one. OkCupid definitely works, but that’s not the whole story. And if you have to choose only one or the other, the mere myth of compatibility works just as well as the truth. Thus the career of someone like Doctor Oz, in a nutshell. And, of course, to some degree, mine.
Everybody should learn to enjoy life! It amazes me how many people can find fault with any or every thing! I have been on OK just a short time but I have met tons of interesting people! I have dated a few. Everybody is not going to be a match! The interesting part of this is having been a research technician some times I play my own games with some of the women I meet on OK! Nothing bad but ways of asking questions and making statements that extract the truth from some female game players! Good luck with any one from the government because they always have to prove their worth by screwing with something!!!!
The unapologetic tone of this post is what bothers me most. And all to sell a freakin’ book.
It’s one thing to ask people to opt in or out of a survey, it’s another to unknowingly manipulate data; without any indication of said manipulation being done; and potentially send users on dates with someone who may be aggressive or misogynistic while you’re site is deliberately cloaking the fact that they are.
the tone of arrogance is unforgivable and I’m confident that the media will ultimately cast the final judgement on deliberate data falsification. (Something I believe that’s typically referred to as fraud.)
Anyone interested in considering the longer term ramifications of this should watch this documentary pronto. Okcupid definitely does not deserve a high five for this.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/terms_and_conditions_may_apply/
Doesn’t really matter if you deceived us or not. No matter who I write to, they very rarely write back. Looks are not extremely important but I still want to be attracted to the woman. I actually read the profiles so I can pick out a girl with the unique qualities I am looking for. Sadly, the only women who seem interested in me are extremely unattractive! The crazy thing is that quite a few women have told me I’m a good-looking guy. I wish somebody would help me write a profile without having to lie about anything. I often wonder if I’ll ever find someone.
OKC, I have been a fan and a user since the focus was more on quizzes and puzzles, so a very long time. The site evolves uses the data to improve, of course!
I love the site, I trust the site and I am aware that the algorithm is helpful up to a point, but the true test is (gasp) my judgment.
No robot’s going to “feel” for me.
There are so many factors , like the number of questions answered and how honestly and carefully the answers have been given
The fact that we can go online, post a profile, answer questions and communicate freely with other people around the world all for FREE on OKC is unique and remarkable.
I really do not understand what people are upset about. The site is great, it’s a tool, use it , be smart.
Thanks OKC!
Of course they do this kind of stuff, but jeez guys, they are isolated and small experiments. For example, look at the difference in the number of users in the double rating plot vs. the number in the “we hid the profile text” plot. For a small amount of time, they collected data on a small number of users in order to learn more about how the system works.
It’s kind of funny that the angry responses are mostly poorly written. I almost never have a high match percentage lead me to a profile with bad grammar or spelling. Oh, you can’t handle the scientific method nor the English language? I won’t miss you if you change dating sites over this…
Holy shit, that’s really cool. I think I may have been one of these experiments but this is really cool, keep doing what you do!
Just for the record, all the dudes who are commenting on this with severe rage are the same dudes who are not getting dates, and this generation is a little bat-shit crazy.
I wonder when in the last decade people decided that businesses are expected to meet their needs, so many egotistical responses from people who are pretending to defend shit they don’t care about.
I would suggest releasing this in Beta to anyone who wants to join the Beta program, thereby making users aware of the experiments but mainly just geeky dudes and you’ll probably get less flack!
I’ve been on OKC for ages, on-and-off, through several relationships (at least one of those BECAUSE of OKC) and find this very interesting.
I have a hunch I do not fall into your predicted behavior but that’s impossible to test as having read this would influence my behavior. Nonetheless, I do generally have longer conversations with people whose text I like very much even if I don’t think they’re really cute.
I wonder about the bit on the false match percentages… several times I remember wondering how come a person appeared to be a perfect match when, reading their question answers, I wanted to kill myself. Of course, the opposite also happened.
As a sidenote, I’m also on POF and have been for a while but at least in my experience and for the region I live in, POF is nowhere near as good, not in matching and not in userbase.
Also, please don’t ever get rid of the “Tests,” even if they continue to be relegated to the footer as a reminder of times past. If it wasn’t for those I’d never have joined OKC in the first place.
It is true that love is blind, but what is failed to be mentioned, most of the time it is also deaf, dumb and stupid!
This is awesome. Did you actually think your compatibility with someone else hinged upon how frequently a potential match use Facebook or their likelihood of entertaining rape fantasies? This is awesome. If you disagree I think you’re dumb. That’s ok though, as long as your profile picture is bangin’.
That sux dud(sic)…who are you guys face-scuz?
Yes, this blog has a tone “of so” what to me.
I am disappointed about the issues here and saying it was o.k to do this..
Trust is a BIG issue in our world and I kinda thought OK Cupid was different.
If you would have been up front maybe some would have participated for the heck of it.
I asked awhile back why so many contacts suddenly vanished..Got some lame reply.Maybe this is why!They weren’t REAL!
I will go off of here and hope a law suit ensues..
Kinda just using people without consent.And thinkin it’s cool.
Well, so much for my confidence in OKC matches….
Thanks,
ani
I’m not classically beautiful, and I’m older. OKCupid has been a challenge for me. One of the problems I see is that someone might be juggling 2 or 3 people they are talking to and then they choose one and BLAM, suddenly they stop talking to the other “us”. No goodbye, no nothing. It’s rather disconcerting. Makes you gun-shy. One gentleman I met in person and I had an 87% match online and we ended up totally incompatible in real time. I love the idea, but the mechanics are messy. But then, so is life. And you do get to meet people you would never run into anywhere else, so it’s a cool thing as well as the hard thing when it hurts you.
This is actually really interesting to me. A friend of mine, who is also on OKC, was incensed when she heard about the social experiments, but I’m enough of a nerd to feel like it’s pretty cool stuff. I love the idea of the “Love is Blind” day. Actually, I’ve only met three people off OKC, and the first two, I met when I did my own one-week-long experiment, after being on here for over six months and not having met anyone – for one week, I responded to every single message that hit my inbox. I didn’t look at pictures, profiles, match percentage, anything, and I went solely by the content of the conversation. The two guys I ended up meeting from that, I went back later and looked at their profiles. I never would have responded to their messages, normally – one was my polar opposite on political views, and the other looked very unhappy in all of his profile pictures and had a very self-depricating tone to his profile. But, they both turned out to be really cool people, and it was great to meet them. I love the idea of doing that site-wide for just a day. It’s sad, though, that so many conversations died so abruptly once pictures were restored – it says so much about people right there, doesn’t it?
Not so interested in reading okc’s blog posts. I’m interested in writing my own journal entries…again. Please, rather than holding us captive to the only journal content on this site and, in effect, gloating about it, bring back our journals so we can write and read what we’d like.
In my personal opinion, the single worst aspect of online dating is how many people lie in their profiles and totally misrepresent themselves, from photos to where they live and what they do for work. It’s endless. Also, many women I’ve met through OKC were either druggies or alcoholics, but clearly stated in their profile that they did not use drugs or consume large quantities of alcohol. The frequency of depressed personalities with very low self-esteem has been another common parameter I’ve encountered here. Experiment all you want, there is no way to prevent people from disinforming others as to their real personality. It would be great to develop a far better screening method for when people fill out their profile, and if a red flag is suddenly raised by this new method, the person is must answer many more questions about themselves or are prevented from joining the site.
thank you for an insightful post
much better communication here than pof
which seems to attract a less thinking and open class of woman
and a lower social class.
an outstanding business model which should be emulated by all businesses – integrity.
have spoken to many women who have been kind enough to respond.
civility has helped me persist on site.
Morality? Ethics? Everybody does it? Really?
Or, if you have not morals or ethics, perhaps simple pragmatism will do. Heard of relationship marketing? This stinks at building relationships.
Pfft.
I THINK YOUR EXPERIMENT IS A CHEAP SHOT AT THE PUBLIC. IF YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU’RE DOING TO BEGIN WITH, THEN YOU DON’T HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE IN THIS BUSINESS. YOU’RE MESSING WITH PEOPLE’S LIVES AND EMOTIONS. SHAME ON YOU!!!!
Iam appreciating that you are trying to convince or change my mind or view.every one should love/enjoy his life .life is dificult but Okcupid is trying to reduce stress by way of various question/alter native option .wherever posible good maching .giving good suggestions
I WILL BE HAPPY TO HELP YOUIN SOME CASES/EXPERIMENT .
Regards
I wish you guys would let us customize our results a bit more. For example, I’d like to select deal breaker questions. If a guy says he “loves to argue,” I don’t even want to see his profile. How hard can that be.
Also, are these little experiments why I have been on so many laughably bad dates lately?
Regarding experiment 2: SO WHAT’S A PICTURE WORTH?
If you examine data sets for different ages, do you see any other trends?
I’m 51. When I browse profiles of women of about the same age, the text can be long and can read like a CV/resume. For me, a writing sample can tell me much. That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it.
When I browse profiles of women half my age (for science of course, lol!), profiles are much shorter. My favorite example self-summary was five words: “I like to have fun!”
Does data show that older people put more value in profile text? Even a little bit? And younger people put less value in profile text?
Or are we all very shallow, no matter our age?
Good article. I like to see factual statistical analysis.
In 10 years you’ve learned that humans are shallow hormone driven liars?
So essentially…nothing…
Well done! =)
You must have received a lot of flack when the Reuters newsfeed about OKC experimentation was… promulgated. Hence the fresh blog on “experiments” on members; damage control.
OKC is better than Match.com (personal experience) for someone who just wants basics; no special pay-for features. HOWEVER, does OKC mgmt have any data which tells them that people over age 55… behave just as stupidly as the under-30 crowd? I’m 63 and I’ve been on your system for months, with little to show for it. My kind of woman READS a man’s profile with a fine-tooth comb, and I get messages to prove it.
And OKC “has a real problem” I think in getting women over 55 to join in Tucson. We only get the losers down here; not like up in Phoenix (I’ve spot-checked the Phx gals….). So damn sick and tired of rode-hard-and-put away-wet biker chicks, and women with no education who are BROKE.
Some conclusions: people behave very badly with internet-based dating sites. They rudely avoid answering any incoming message if they “think” they don’t like the person. OKC should consider some trick from the behavioral economist’s playbook to FORCE a reply, even a “sorry, not my cup of tea” sort of response to the sender… otherwise the recipient’s account gets locked up or some other penalty (like not displaying profile pictures) kicks in automatically.
About the author: I’ve been “in the dating trenches” for years since I’m an engineer with a bit of Dilbert personality. The old NSR (National Singles Register) was more effective in connecting people because the sender of a letter, rather than an email message, had more effort into the process, and he/she enjoyed getting replies back in the snail mail. More advice:
I am also a veteran of Great Expectations videodating… was a “life member” back before California passed legislation banning such contracts. What I learned: people are incredibly SUBJECTIVE in their perception of both photographs and profile pages. As my own experiment: I would “pick” some women out for later consideration, then re-review their video tapes and profile pages a week or two later. Depending on my MOOD, the revisit often revealed that I did not find them interesting. I should have performed a symmetrical experiment: selecting a few who did not “appeal” to me for later re-review.
Bottom line for OKC: your software should somehow “prod” members to revisit people that they previously received messages from, and rejected… perhaps?
Your “one size fits all” approach may not be doing the job for OLDER and/or high-IQ members. Perhaps there should also be an “option button” for new members to select what site features to enable, e.g., “less interested in profiles, more in photos” or vice-versa.
The age thing is another peeve: 50-something women are afraid to respond positively to someone age 60 or slightly older. There must be some “threshold effect” like we used to joke about when someone hits 30.
I have come across so much IRRATIONAL BEHAVIOR from women on both Match.com and OK Cupid that I’m wondering how men and women ever manage to get together at all… even via the normal means: meeting at work, standing in line at the bank, etc.
Regards,
-Steve
You do not compare a humainbeing like this picture. It is very disgracefull for all human.
Good article. A bit long winded though. Started to get bored.
Well, I don’t know if I was a part of the experiment or not, but I met my now-husband in November of last year. We got married in March and are now expecting our first child. I am curious if we were part of this process or not, but regardless, OKCupid worked really well for us. We couldn’t be happier. Thanks for all that you do.
So…
I’m a person who has looked at the match percentages and dismissed them as being inaccurate. I make my decisions who I would like to contact based both on their pictures and their profile content. I need to see both before reachin out.
Potentially I have contacted women who would have been great matches for me and I’ve been rejected because OkC doctored the stats and told those ladies I wouldn’t be good for them. By the same token this somewhat answers why I receive messages from women who at an easy first glance are painfully obviously not people I would be able to get along with. OkC told them I was a good match and they ran with it without actually looking at my profile.
F’ed up. But, the site is free so I guess I got what I paid for.
This is as fascinating as it is ethically dubious. You should be proud. Or not.
As a psychologist, and a user of okcupid, I find this immensely interesting. At the same time, it is a little troubling that there was some manipulation involved. The downside of telling opposites they attract is that the next step usually is ‘opposites attack.’ I wonder how many people had a really bad experience with someone who was ultimately a horrible match for them…
Honestly, this doesn’t bug me at all. I met a guy that OkC kept showing me even though he was only a 63% match. I liked his profile, thought we had a lot in common, and he was attractive.
We dated, decided to stay friends after four dates, and shazam. Afterward, OkC emails me to say “whoops, got that wrong! You were actually a 93% match”
Duh, I thought.
I think people in general should be more open to other people, and worry less about photos/numbers/etc.
Nice try but doesn’t work. Its obvious to me that if I have nothing in common with somebody, no amount of statistical probability will make me like him. And I don’t care how handsome he is, if his profile is blank, why would I be interested?
Hooray, a new blog post!
It’s been so long
Oh, everyone… lighten up. I like okcupid because it’s free and just as good as the sites where one needs to pay. I answered very few questions and never looked at who was supposed to be a match. I am over 60 and always look at the photos and details first. Then I read the essays. Any with poor spelling or grammar are ignored. Any men my age who are not wearing shirts or look creepy are likewise ignored.
I have met someone on OK whom I like and have been dating, but if I had heard all his statistics, I might have ignored him (he’s a Republican, I’m an ultra-liberal. He’s from Texas, I’m from NY.) but we like each other and surface differences don’t matter. I’m glad neither he nor I filled out all the questions. Chemistry is important and all I can say is “I’ll know it when I see it.”
There are 3 kinds of lies:
Lies, damn lies ansd statistics.
I love your site because you guys are the only ones that help us weed out the jerks. I love your questions they show alot about a person, every site out there i have bad dates on but this one i haven’t had 1 bad date, and i have had alot so far. On dates from sites like pof i will be sitting there with them and i find so many things about them that are deal breakers that on this site i would know ahead of time and weed them out and not even give them my number. Another thing that i love about this sight is that you give mileage about how far away someone is and your site is not cognitively overwhelming like POF.The same men are flashed in front of your face for months and your tired of looking at them. i also like that you dont send me matches that contain over 50 people and not say were they are located Like POF. i actually look at the matches from OKCUPID. The only things i would have to say that i didn’t like would be that men aren’t to informed about the questions on ok cupid because of the phone app and i wish there were more controls on the type of pics used like when men pop up and its just there penis flashed at you. i just wish that there was a way to block all profiles without pics. I also wish that i could block all visitors from other countries and states that aren’t Ohio where i am located. But most of all i would love for you guys to make it mandatory for men 2 have at least 200 questions answered or have to do a certain amount every-time that they log on or or let them know that women can block them if they have below 200 questions answered and they would be seen only by like 1% of women on the site. These questions are really important and show alot about a person Please keep your questions going. Your site gives more insight about a person than any sight out there, i have seen them all and to me yours is number 1!!!! out of them all These questions on this sight make you the best and tell me that you care about my security and safety other sites dont. There where some men that when i looked at there questions i seen that they lacked i compassion and true goodness and i could have been in serious trouble if i went with them but there questions showed they were apathetic and dangerous. Plus there is more to speak about when you have a chance to go over all the questions The message box comes down and you can ask away if you want to and it just gets more and more interesting. i haven’t ever had so much fun on a dating site before but it would be more fun even if more men answered more questions so it wouldn’t seem so blah sometime like just Hello and how are you doing. this site can make this an addicting intense game of getting to know each other and it is totally healthy because Barbra Deangeliss and John grey always emphasize about how important it is to ask questions from the beginning of a relationship Plus i dont feel like men are just shaping everything that they say to manipulate when they have questions answered. SO i have to say Being a cognition technology student your site is number 1 and your site encourages healthy conversation that doesn’t automatically put people on the spot. Your site is easy to operate. Your set-up helps women to feel safer. THANK YOU!!!!!! OKCUPID your site is above all others and i deeply appreciate your willingness to help everyone get to know each other
Surveillance is the business model of the Internet.
Hooray.
Yes, it has made you very rich. But do not expect us to dance around and laud you for it.
Pollution and global climate change are industrial business models.
Hooray hooray.
I must throw my hands in the air, of course, now you have enlightened me.
Gorgeous, honest and open blog. Loved it. Thanks for all those posts. I really feel the humanity behind the business.
With results like these, they should just keep the pictures turned off. Or just have a picture for a profile…
Hi, very interesting post. I’m definitely in the group of guys that had no success with the site so far. I’ve written many many messages and had not a one single date. Not even able to continue a conversation.
I actually find this very similar to real life (not online). The attractive women almost never answer. Doesn’t matter what clever lines or extreme sincerity I put in a message. And I’m an OK looking guy. Maybe this is the problem, as you state earlier? haha
Anyway, as you are the experts, is there something that can be done to solve the situation? Or it is just as it is? I just don’t have it in me.
BTW I’m from Lima Peru and most of the girls I write to are locals. Maybe this has something to do?
Hi, thanks for sharing your data. What does it mean to me? Well, I was checking things myself. When I found a woman pix I liked and was told of a low match percentage, I checked her answers against mine and found we weren’t as miss matched as OKC said!
That made ME determine that OKCs match data was unreliable.
Now, I find I may have been in an experiment that was deliberately feeding me erroneous data. What am I supposed to do, Resubscribe at the end of my term? I call a DO OVER and request a full refund or a free “experiment free” membership for a year.
Im not sure how I feel about changing numbers for an expirement but its glad to know the site is trying. Maybe a helpline or email to figure why things arent working with your matches. Are you shooting too high or emailing the wrong thing. I happen to not photograph well but im told im good looking so girls I email I never hear from and I never know if thats why. Also is there anyway to have girls post pics from the last year or two not five or ten years ago. Ive done blind dates before and better or worse than you hoped is always better than not recognising the person youve been chatting with.
Are you going to refund me for the shitty dates I had?
I do think that experiments tell us useful stuff, but there are reasons why social science has developed ethical standards, and I expect you to follow these. Experiments that involve no cost to participants and don’t involve luing to them are one thing. But when they involve deception, you start to incur risks of costs and other harm to your subjects. Generally, this should be done when people have have been informed that they might be deceived or incur specific costs/risks and have given consent. Exceptions should only occur when an independent ethics board has agreed that the social benefits outweigh the individual costs and risks and that suitable compensation and mitigation is provided. This is especially true for a commercial entity pursuing a profit. This is what people are upset about, not simply experimentation. Your smug failure to acknowledge this legitimate concern has only further damged your image with me.
You’re referring to me as guinea pig. You guys are liars
Guess what guinea pigs, this OKCupid blog is obviously another freakin’ experiment, so be sure to smile for your posts, suckers!!
F you OkC. I’m now happy I didn’t subscribe a few weeks ago as I was planning. I don’t have time or $ to waste on dates with incompatible people. Ever hear of asking for someone’s consent before participating in something like this? How are we supposed to believe anything from you now?
I have to say I like Steve K.’s write-up. Messing with people like this is crap. Re-using our information is crap. Marketing us and trying to get rich off of people’s depression, disappointment, and desperation is crap. My pictures are honestly me, and my profile is me. I don’t receive serious starting messages – I barely get any communication from the state where I live, and I get almost no responses to anything I send. Perhaps I’m all-around repulsive in picture and/or text form, or maybe there is more filtering in use by the system so that people never see what I say.
To this site and all others: Stop being Crap. If you dare to misrepresent me, I may repel your users, but the data I want people to see will still be true for me (or a blatant lie to break information-stealing systems).
Well I’m out. Take mine back. I WAS raped. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO TRY TO EXPLAIN YOUR WAY OUT OF THIS ONE????????