We Experiment On Human Beings!

July 28th, 2014 by Christian Rudder

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?

† Once the experiment was concluded, the users were notified of the correct match percentage.

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.

1,220 Responses to “We Experiment On Human Beings!”

  1. Joshua says:

    I met someone from your site who had a 0% match with me and a 99% enemy rating and got along with her better then I did a woman who had a 92% match rating with 13% enemy rating ,although in other cases it has been more accurate

  2. RainyDaySunshine says:

    i’ve never blogged and i’m not sure what you are looking for here, but photo’s are important to me so guys can see me. I date younger men and 12 years ago photo’s were not that important, but i’m older now and heavier too and i don’t want to waste their time or mine so they need to see me. I’ve had relationships with men up to 24 years younger and on here i’ve gotten responses up to 37 years younger which i decline gracefully i hope, but it’s still good for the ego. i want to see the eyes and the smile of those i am considering as possibilities so yes…keep the photos.

  3. Steve says:

    The only thing I see out of this is that only an average of 15% of people actually respond to messages… that’s just sad….

    The rest of them are just [input whatever else you can think of]

  4. SecondChance1967 says:

    Oh good. You brought numbers and graphs.

    Super.

    I’ve been on here for about four years, now. Not a single date from your shiney, glittery, well-packaged site.

    Not one.

    And now, turns out, you got busted running the table. What else have you idiots not told us?

    When my membership runs out, we are done, OKFU.

  5. Floyd says:

    You may gloat about alleged experiments with human beings, but realistically, your site blows chunks. Huge selection of disaffected females with ZERO interest in sex. What a crock. Take your server and donate it to the Mormon church. Love, Floyd

  6. E in big D says:

    I freakin’ loved this article- thanks for sharing and the graphs ( flashback to gradeschool on how to read!). But I def. believe in the power of suggestion, humans are so damn gullible. Anyway, really interesting and I like how it surmised the FB scandal. Much of a scandal? I guess not…
    But I still loathe the damn site, esp. after the NSA revelations.
    Thanks again!

  7. ET says:

    Great information. Book looks interesting..do we really want to know?

  8. purplerider says:

    So you played games with users. Grand. On your “no photos day” I didn’t message anyone. I won’t bother getting in touch with any no photo profile. And if nothing is written on the profile, I won’t bother with them. There are certain things that I consider when dating. One is that I would never accept anyone that wasn’t phyically active. I could care less if I connected mentally to an out of shape person. Part of my life includes being active, and I would never be happy with someone who wasn’t. I learned early on in life that being alone without a partner isn’t so horrible. You can try to match me with every unattractive, yet compatable woman that ever signed onto the site, and chances are excellent that I simply won’t bother to send message one. Because I can stand to be alone.

  9. Azriel says:

    Since I am new here and not formed any “conversations” yet, I still find this very interesting and wonder just how well it really works?? If folks are that shallow, then when they see a person that is a 30% match, they are not even going to put that much effort in creating a relationship with that person. Whereas they see a 90% match, and they will put more effort into creating a relationship. I’ve always been one who seeks out the underdogs to relate to. Why? Because they usually are more real and more interesting than the most popular people. And for me, being real is the most import aspect for any relationship.

  10. Ying says:

    So, moving forward we can expect to manipulated and lied to by ok Cupid? Hysterical! I have jut that kind if sense iof humor. Fortunately, most people will never read thus through or realize they might still be told matches are good or bad falsely. Too funny.

  11. Russ says:

    You and the people who run this site are beyond worthless and arrogant. I knew something was up with your matching when you matched me high with someone I knew in real life and was NO match for me. Also given the fact I tend to get along much better with people with far lower match percent I knew something was up. You are nothing but blatant and worthless liars you tout the Matchmaking yet try matching people with other’s who are nowhere near their match and try to say this as a positive thing? You are nothing but worthless assholes and deserve all the bad press and publicity you can get people come here trusting your word,trusting that you as a dating site will give them good matches and advice as you advertise this is nothing but lies and false advertisement.

  12. el-que says:

    I quit facebook when I found out about their experiments. The experiments OKC did were to assess the site’s effectiveness, which is fine with me, Facebook’s experiments were used to mess with people’s state of mind by blocking their positive posts, blocking positive posts from friends, etc. If I ever find out that OKcupid is teasing me with fake profiles or trying to manipulate my emotions by censoring information, I’ll quit so fast! On top of it, I can’t wait until someone files a class action against facebook. I’ll sign up for that in a heartbeat. So keep experimenting with your site but do it in a way that doesn’t affect user’s emotions in negative ways.

  13. Mike D says:

    I’m happy to see that the blog is being updated and I hope to read more updates in the future.

    I found this information to be interesting and helpful, but was especially interested by the section regarding the rating of others. Since OkCupid’s rating system is vague, but I thought I had something of a handle on what its purpose was. This article, however, makes me question the conclusions I’ve drawn.

    Originally, I rated the overall impact of a profile (combining personality and physical attractiveness), but currently rate only attractiveness. This shift was caused by a brief stint on the A-List, which allowed me to filter matches by “attractiveness.” When I tried out this feature, it gave me the option to only look for profiles with a certain star-threshold (four-star or above, five-star etc). If someone paying for a subscription were to see a profile boosted by a rating motivated by anything other than attractiveness, isn’t that counterproductive?

    I also considered how much more subjective I believe personality to be than physical attractiveness. A personality that I find compatible is relatively unique to me, so it would not be helpful to someone else who might have a different perspective. Should the feature be used differently, or should perhaps the site provide more information on how the data is applied?

  14. J says:

    I met a girl on OKC who was a 90% match. She ended up cheating on me two weeks into the relationship and dumping me when I tried to convince her not to kill herself over the fact she cheated. For the record she’s still alive and is dating someone else now, so.

  15. OutandAbout says:

    Considering the fact that we are getting something for free that in the off line world costs way to much. And I did pay it back in the day 2Grand for less than what this site offers. You have to ask yourself, how do they make the bills?

    From radio talk shows like Marketplace and other business shows I know it’s no secret that they glean information from free offering like this site or POF or Google, and make money off that information. At least there telling us what they’re doing and sharing the results. Even if we have to buy a book to get all of the details.

  16. Bill Romance says:

    Well how about that …. it looks like this blog post was written with the ulterior motive of selling a book … surprise, surprise.

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385347375?ie=UTF8&tag=randohouseinc700267-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0385347375

  17. Aggie4691 says:

    I’m going to startup my account as soon as my credit card gets here. Which is I hope here extremely soon I don’t want to leave you as I’ve had good luck,but another Scammer too! I’m hoping I can find a way to find her. I hope to see you very soon. I’m NOT LEAVING THIS WORLD without,finding my Soulmate hopefully soon.

  18. YaKar says:

    There’s no such thing as a percect algorithm for anything that involves human thinking and relationships. There is also no website that can be really accurate and efficient in matching people. Of course, there are sites which are just a scam, no matter how good looking and how (even) serious they might appear to be.
    And your experiments are just to confirm, for an online portal, what is part of the human reproductive behaviour (yes, I am using this language, because at the end we are just animals with a little higher awareness of ourselves compared to other animals, and sometimes our self pride is way too high above what we actually deserve).
    Yes, we humans take a strong look first on the physical side, because is in our genes to seek for a good-in shape mother or father, and the so-called selfish gen is largely responsible for that. It does not matter if we are garbage workers, secretaries, customers service representatives or PhD in Nuclear Physics, we first look, on a first approach to someone, at the face and the body. Maybe a little after, when this “handsome” or “pretty” says tons of stupidities, we choose to put a distance and seek for someone brighter. And the power of suggestion, is studied from very ancient times and was largely responsible of the overwhelming positive response that Adolf Hitler enjoyed in Germany during the second half of the 1930’s decade, with the aid of his Ministry of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels. Of course I am not comparing OkCupid to Goebbels, not by far. In fact, these studies and ironies say that you have been doing your best in achieving good matches for people, although the inversion of numbers doesn’t sound very ethical.
    Anyway, keep the site on the move and I wish you success, with all my heart.

  19. everyone says:

    how can we ever trust you again?
    what’s the next deception planned on us?
    what else aren’t you telling us?

    your blog was inactive for 3 years until your secret experiments on the cupid users was revealed in the mass media. now, you’re telling us it’s ok because everyone does it. everyone doesn’t, but you got caught. today’s news says the FTC is now involved in your deceptions and law suits are coming.

  20. Rimio says:

    Keep these blog posts up, and also the experiments. They turn up interesting data.

  21. Michael says:

    Good information, I look forward to another blog entry. In the future, please help me get a date.

  22. raj says:

    Nice research

  23. Jeannie says:

    So happy you came back! I LOVE your writing style! The data from the experiments is fascinating as usual.

    Hopefully you will share some more of your insights in a future (soonish?) blog post.

  24. Juneau12 says:

    Your graphics and charts are too small to read on mobile.
    Did you check stats on different age groups? ‘Cause I think attractiveness might rate differently w 55+ group than with 20 somethings. That being said, most older men put horrible selfies on their site, taken in the dark, either by the green glow of their computer desktop or in the bathroom in full view of the open toilet.
    If they are outside, they are wearing huge sunglasses and hats.
    How can anyone tell what they really look like, it would have to be better than most of the photos.
    What they write in the profile is very important. That and the questions section is the only reason OK is better than the other sites.
    Sharing info with NSA is Not OK. Experiments to improve the site are understandable. Needs to be a way to screen out the three big “nevers” however. Thanks for trying,

  25. awkwardmeowza says:

    Most frustrating thing for me is I have contacted like, every woman in America with a 95-99 percent match that I found remotely attractive (we’re talking like, 100 women) and have received maybe 2 or 3 responses, only a couple of which go beyond one exchange.

    This is kinda mind-blowing because I never had issues offline getting dates or friendships. Check my profile and you’ll see I”m not hideous either. What the heck do these people want?

  26. Frank Williams says:

    Nice. As in accurate. Very perceptive. Thx. But…. we are not machines . We’re humans with all our contraditions.. any way. I don’t think there is much to get riled up. You did your job.. gday to you. And all others.

  27. veloster360 says:

    Okcupid robot failed to understand that these emotionless females on the site have always one purpose: hunt for wealthy men around the world to milk them like cows. Finally, love has nothing to do with these predators.

  28. hollypop says:

    I have met someone on your site and it has worked out great so fare. We have ban going out for two and a half years and still going strong. I love him with all my heart and he was 90% match for me. It’s great that we have been able to meet even when he lived in a different state then I did. We dated for a year then he moved to where I live.

  29. matt says:

    Stupid post. I agree with steve and that only 15 percent of people respond on here. That’s horrible!! Boring and the matches suck and now they say they are messing with the people who actually pay to use this site?! 100 percent worthless site

  30. Tom says:

    “my operating theory is that hotter guys were assholes more often”

    Stick to analysing data. This is just an offensive remark based on a hunch.

  31. DoingIsKing says:

    It was refreshing to find straight forward and honest words like that.

    I will give away an idea that maybe crossed your mind already:

    Beside “date” websites, there is a huge social demand for “just friends” communities.

    If you check the data about loneliness (like Cacioppo & Patrick’s), this is becoming an epidemic problem in USA.

    Many times we just want to find a group of people to chat about common interest topics (regardless of gender, age or race).

    Dating sites create an expectation in the “romance” area that actually works against this endeavor.

    You already have everything: the filters, the simplicity and the community. All that is missed is the implicit purpose.

    Yes, there is a profile label that is called “I’m looking for” with the option “new friends” but that is not enough. If I just check the profile of a guy who is reading the same books I do, he’ll freak out thinking that I may want to hold hands across a dinner table.

    I’m sure that a real “friend finder” will be a goldmine of data and money.

    PD.
    I love your data mining. I envy your DBA

  32. bigdata says:

    Anyone high fiving Okcupid for this might consider watching the documentary listed below. Maybe a few people will actually understand what’s really going on here… the commodification of your personal digital data profile – something private data collecting firms pay handsomely for.

    Welcome to the age of “BIG DATA” folks…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzyafieRcWE

  33. HenrytheV says:

    Interesting…and amusing.
    I like the site, it is free, and I’ve met some really interesting & nice people.
    And I’m very much in a niche, so I’ve found being very upfront and honest leads to better and more interesting conversations.

  34. James says:

    After using OKCupid, PoF, etc. with no success, I finally hit it big a few years back and met a wonderful woman who is now my wife. Where, you may wonder? On Craigslist. It’s hard to beat them for simple, direct ads targeted to thousands of singles in your area.

    They don’t play these types of games with their users, either.

  35. thalia1388 says:

    this is why people who have great deal on match percentages looks so funny and might feel dumb…. good side is, this only proves that compatibility is not shown by numbers!

  36. K b says:

    So what you are saying is the data you collect is unreliable at any given time and the match percentage is played with at any given time so users are never going to know what is real and what is fake. So are you doing this to paid users and free users ..it’s one thing to play with people’s lives and another to joke about it,, It is good you fessed up to this. Bullshit I dosen’t make it right.

  37. April Spiva says:

    This is why guys with profile names like ’69$ir’ and couldn’t spell three letter words were lusted as being a great match for me.

  38. Randal says:

    This made me like this site even more. Sure, you experimented with us, but it was for the sole purpose of making the site even better. Hell, it may have gotten some people to meet up with others that they would never have met before.

    For me though, the words in a person’s profile are very important, but I doubt I’m average, so I’m not surprised. Still, I’m far from being a hunk and the findings about photos make me kinda sad.

    This is a FREE site (unless you pay for anonymity/other privileges), so I don’t mind any experimentation. My only ethical concern would be if OKC also experimented with paying users, who are paying extra for their experience, albeit not being experimented on isn’t exactly what they’re paying for, but still. . .

    Lastly, I see a few disgruntled (male) comments from people who’ve NEVER had a date sprout from their efforts on this site. Like I wrote, I am not overly attractive; nonetheless, when I put a bit of effort in I get regular dates from OKC. Again, I am not cool. So, am I doing something right or are they doing something wrong? In all honesty, I don’t know. However, below are a few things I’ve noticed:
    1. Better matches reply more often, even if their profiles make you seem less than compatible.
    2. Pretty girls reply less often. Their inboxes are probably full of perfectly good, but average men. Is there something that sets you apart on your profile that would help you land a date? What niche isn’t getting covered by other guys looking for dates? Be honest and truthful.
    3. Are you in an area with lots of ladies? I am not, so my best matches are far away. If you are not in a big city you may have to have more patience because. . .
    4. . .long distant matches are less likely to respond even if they’re a good match. In fact, low matches who are geographically close by are more likely to reply than a good match who lives 90+ miles away. I might get one or two messages back, but conversations tend to just suddenly stop.

    I grant, these “findings” are only from me, but I hope they help, ’cause I have gotten dates, even some sex due to my efforts on OKC. The best part of OKC though has been the new female friends I’ve made here. That might change when/if I move to a larger metropolitan area because more population means more potential romantic matches, but I still hope even then to keep using OKC to make friends with people whom I might otherwise never have had a chance to meet.

  39. Gail says:

    The percentage at e not always correct

  40. DamnRedhead says:

    I do find it hilarious that this morning my match percentages were in the upper thousands.

    I got matched at 9268% with someone! HOW IS THAT MATHEMATICALLY POSSIBLE? I’m a statistician (seriously, I am) and even I’m stumped!

  41. Elise4455 says:

    I find it interesting that I keep being matched up with scammers, liars, people portraying themselves as someone else. You forgot to include that in your statistics. Also, even though I have reported the scammers, I still see them back on as someone with a new identity; same face, new name. Really? Someone isn’t paying attention.

  42. Hopelessromantic1966 says:

    This only proves what I have suspected all along: humans are shallow. Though I take the time to read the profiles of the people I am interested in, too many don’t. A picture may be worth a thousand words, however, having something in common helps too.

  43. gentleasrain says:

    Opposites do attract and complement one another. In 1998, I met a woman through another dating site. We seemed to be complete opposites of one another in every way. Our first date was to put it bluntly a “booty call” for both of us. There was passion from the get go, more than I have ever experienced with anyone else. Conversations between sessions of love making increased in depth and breadth. We developed genuine concern for one another’s welfare and for that of our families. Soon we were attending one another’s family functions and sharing the most important events of one another’s lives. Now more than 16 years later she is my best friend. The saying, “Show me who you love and I will show you who you are,” definitely applies. We have grown far more like one another. By mutual consent, marriage between us is not on the table… but this is a beautiful relationship that flies directly in the face of the matching methods that most sites use. Perhaps one day someone will come up with a matching method that is based on the sort of “animal magnetism” that drew us to one another and that has kept us together.

  44. Queekstraw says:

    So pictures trump the profile huh? Not a big surprise. When you have read as many profiles as I have you find that they are full of pap and clichés. I can’t count how many times I’ve read “I love to laugh”, and “warm sunshine centers me”, “I like to have fun”, and “I love my family”, etc. Well, who doesn’t love their family, huh? And who doesn’t love to laugh? The way these profiles are written, they all look the same.

    When a man comes into a dance and sees someone across the room he wishes to get to know better, it’s not because he read her profile in the pub’s menu. Sure personality counts for a lot. But real personality is too complex to display in a profile. The only way to really know a personality is to go through life with it a little.

    I had a very wise psychologist friend once tell me that there is scientific evidence to suggest that when two people meet, they know if they are attracted within 15 seconds, and it isn’t from reading the slogans on each other’s T-shirts.

  45. Mist says:

    Am I the only one who feels violated?

    You read our messages, you change matches and you manipulate our lives while we’re trusting your website!

    I always take matches pretty seriously and do not even bother to look at a profile or a picture if someone contacting me is less than 70% match or more than 30% enemies.

    Which means that if I was part of your experiment I may have lost the opportunity to meet my other half (which supposedly is the purpose of this site) because of you!

    Unacceptable.

    If you want to experiment ask people to volunteer without telling them what kind of experiment it’s going to be.
    Don’t go around messing our lives. We’re all here for a specific reason and that doesn’t involve being experimental subjects.

  46. Me says:

    To all the people complaining that OKstupid doesn’t get you any dates… they JUST explained that people focus 90% on looks, and that the rest of your profile is meaningless.
    So, if people don’t talk to you, stop blaming OKC. You’re just ugly. OR you’re the 10% where people actually read your profile and you’re creepy as fuck.

  47. Pete says:

    I actually commend OkStupid for doing this, I think it’s great! And what better way to analyze the social dynamics of online users than by throwing a curve ball out there.

    I’ve used OkCupid for over 4 years and I’m 29 year old now. I’ve been on plenty of dates and definitely met some quality women, I also have my fair share of absolute horror stories…

    I am not a Channing Tatum, I consider myself to be a relatively good looking guy and overall, I am confident and like who I am; with that being said, the majority of women who messaged me actually DID, read my profile…in it’s entirety (it’s quite lengthy). Also, most of them were high percentage matches!!

    As a male user on OkCupid, you need to be extremely proactive..I did message a lot of women, some responded, and many did not – rejection is just part of the game gents. If you can’t handle it on here, you probably can’t handle rejection in real life either..whether its your relationships, a job, whatever..be a f*ckin man

    And yes, our first instincts are to go for physical attraction, but there are plenty of users (mainly women) who are looking for more, than just a hook-up. Look, we all want to “get it in”… Women don’t need to search for sex on the internet, even the unattractive ones. They’re hit on all day, much more so than us men, even if you’re a freaking stud, BRO!!

    So to the clowns commenting below that are complaining about not getting laid and blah blah blah….step up your game, take your selfies down, differentiate yourself from the majority to get noticed, and grow a set by messaging more women, especially if OkCupid is telling you they’re a good match, whether it’s BS or not!! Just do it!! Most of you have missed the point of this blog, sadly.

    -Pete

  48. DigitallWellness says:

    Interesting trends. One thing I’m not sure how to account for in the current system is abject dealbreakers, like the tall handsome, well spoken 96% match to me who “thinks homosexuality is a sin” and to whom I replied that I don’t date bigots.

    So… sometimes it’s a je ne sais quoi. And sometimes you sais.

  49. DoesntMatter says:

    As an engineer i totally understand how important experiments are. I know pharmaceutical companies do it with “approved” drugs that they push on their doctors. Truth is we have been lab rats for decades. The scary part is when the users are abused an forced to experience trauma of some sort or another, but still, interesting information into the human species is developed. The funny part is i knew you guys were running experiments so a little bit of your data might be skewed or incorrect. Still, a picture is always 1000 words, and profile information only adds dept to the individual regardless of how shallow he or she might be. Honestly, i wouldn’t be on here if i didn’t live such a hectic life. I prefer to meet someone in real life like the old days. Maybe shake their hand, look at their eyes and see their body language. That’s how you really know if you like each other. Most person to person communication is body language anyways.

    Suggestions:

    Keep the forums/blogs or whatever you call them. I feel like they serve as a “watering hole” scenario where people can just chat freely.

    Allow more photos. Why do you think facebook is so successful. Some people communicate better with pictures.

    Oh and take off that “A-list” make-us-pay extra crap. You truly want to be a successful “online dating site” then don’t charge your customers. That is what we are still right, i mean aside from guinea pigs. Dont be a match.com. You already get payment from us with experiments and commercials.

    I have had some success on here. A couple of dates here and there, but nothing long term. I think we are still somewhat scared and skeptical. I myself need to have several back and forth conversations before im willing to meet. Who wants to spend time and energy to drive across the bay for something that is destine to fail. Find a way to monitor conversations maybe??? i duno, i just think there are a lot of creeps out there, and for this reason women are skeptical… I mean im sure they still play the “hard to get game”, maybe allow people to be friends 1st. I duno, keep working on it OKC some day we might be talking to programs/robots in experients haha. Cheers.

  50. Aimcolumbus1nesw says:

    Well that explains a lot. I don’t appreciate being matched with guys who are looking for other guys though.