🌿 
>42
>5.7
It's over.
>5.7
It's over.
Timeline
Post
Remote status
Context
7
@mangeurdenuage Fun fact: I once thought about joining that site, but took their personality test and got rejected. A not uncommon occurrence apparently, at least back then.
@echo Personality tests ?
@mangeurdenuage I have no idea if they still do it, but eHarmony had you take a test/quiz so that they could match you up with people with similar or compatible personalities. But if they felt they couldn't reliably match you up with anyone, they would just not even let you join.
There were theories on a couple forums I checked (remember searching google and getting links to random forums instead of plebbit?) about what the "right" and "wrong" answers were, but no one knew for sure.
There were theories on a couple forums I checked (remember searching google and getting links to random forums instead of plebbit?) about what the "right" and "wrong" answers were, but no one knew for sure.
@echo @mangeurdenuage I am 99% sure they were filtering people with no job and no hobbies, which is a substantial category of unloved people but are simply not going to find matches no matter what you do
@sun @mangeurdenuage @echo really? I know they filtered people divorced many times and people with mental disorders and depression, as well as gay people because they were a Christian site
@redneonglow @mangeurdenuage @echo they filtered gay people because the truth is you can't really heavily optimize your process for two very different dating pools and so they focused on one.
@sun @redneonglow @mangeurdenuage @echo
last time looking such a site was okc like 12 years ago, but their solution was just have a button setting your own. "remove all straights" was fairly nice usability feature, but christian would be a better tag for that separate pool think (or a "culturally so" autofilter rather than self-identified), because then you get access to the few straight guys who don't suck
last time looking such a site was okc like 12 years ago, but their solution was just have a button setting your own. "remove all straights" was fairly nice usability feature, but christian would be a better tag for that separate pool think (or a "culturally so" autofilter rather than self-identified), because then you get access to the few straight guys who don't suck
Replies
6
@ageha @redneonglow @mangeurdenuage @echo I extensively used both eharmony and okcupid, my opinion was that okcupid worked better despite marketing to everyone. eharmony was a good idea but the execution didn't live up to the hype quite. on the other hand, they didn't sell all their data to a marketing company like okcupid did
@sun @redneonglow @mangeurdenuage @ageha okcupid was worthless for me. Not a single reply to any of the messages I sent. My sister signed up, mostly just for shits and giggles, and started getting messages within hours of creating her account. I deleted mine soon after.
A coworker recommended plentyoffish, he actually met his wife on there. I only got two women to chat with me. (Since it was a free site, they didn't restrict off-site communication, so we exchanged AIM handles.) Neither went anywhere, though.
A coworker recommended plentyoffish, he actually met his wife on there. I only got two women to chat with me. (Since it was a free site, they didn't restrict off-site communication, so we exchanged AIM handles.) Neither went anywhere, though.
@echo @redneonglow @mangeurdenuage @ageha I was using it early on and it worked really really good, but a couple years ago I popped back on it and it was compeltely different than before and really sucked.
@ageha @redneonglow @mangeurdenuage @sun @echo You'd basically get rid of all the guys that are interested in a long term relationship by doing that
At that point it's better to use grindr
At that point it's better to use grindr