The Online Dating Thread 3..**READ 1ST POST Oct 2012**

awec

This post has been deleted.

Shapey Fiend

http://niceguysofokc.tumblr.com/

riveratom

Chatting with two different girls at the minute, they both mailed me first. Doing a little experiment on POF for the craic. I created a new profile with new pics the other day, and hid my old one. So far I haven't mailed anyone, and have received one first-contact email

GreeBo

So I've been on POF nearly a week now and sent probably 50 messages with maybe 2 replies.
I received a few unsolicited msgs from people but is the response rate really this low for guys?

Is the issue that girls just have far too many msgs to even try to look at them all or do I need to just accept it and maybe aim lower?

The issue I have with this is that if Im not msging people whom I am attracted to...why am I even on here?!

Galvasean

GreeBo wrote: »

So I've been on POF nearly a week now and sent probably 50 messages with maybe 2 replies.
I received a few unsolicited msgs from people but is the response rate really this low for guys?

Is the issue that girls just have far too many msgs to even try to look at them all or do I need to just accept it and maybe aim lower?

The issue I have with this is that if Im not msging people whom I am attracted to...why am I even on here?!

Quite a lot of girls do get an awful lot of mail and yes the response rate really is that low for most guys. Personally, I think I'm in the one in 30-40 bracket in terms of responses (30 being a one reply only, 40 an actual conversation I reckon).
You shouldn't take it personally as chances are it's not a reflection on you (well that's what I tell myself anyway).

knucklehead6

GreeBo wrote: »

So I've been on POF nearly a week now and sent probably 50 messages with maybe 2 replies.
I received a few unsolicited msgs from people but is the response rate really this low for guys?

Is the issue that girls just have far too many msgs to even try to look at them all or do I need to just accept it and maybe aim lower?

The issue I have with this is that if Im not msging people whom I am attracted to...why am I even on here?!

The reply rate debate has been done to death. Some lads get lucky, and get a fair few responses. Others not so much.

I'm a not so much! :-)

Don't let it get to you, there's no point. All that will happen is you'll end up like one of the blokes in shapeys post above. You need a SERIOUSLY thick skin at this thing.

GreeBo

Cheers lads!
Anyone else find themselves shouting things like "if you just gave me a chance we could be great together!" at their screen?

/edit
Also, do you lads still msg people you find attractive and ignore any notion of "leagues"?
If they reply great, if not mneah?

knucklehead6

GreeBo wrote: »

Cheers lads!
Anyone else find themselves shouting things like "if you just gave me a chance we could be great together!" at their screen?

/edit
Also, do you lads still msg people you find attractive and ignore any notion of "leagues"?
If they reply great, if not mneah?

Leagues are for team sports!

mood

GreeBo wrote: »

Cheers lads!
Anyone else find themselves shouting things like "if you just gave me a chance we could be great together!" at their screen?

/edit
Also, do you lads still msg people you find attractive and ignore any notion of "leagues"?
If they reply great, if not mneah?

Don't waste you time emailing women who you wouldn't be a match for (in the age bracket they have stated, location, want the same things etc). That would be a waste of time IMO.

Esoteric_

GreeBo wrote: »

Cheers lads!
Anyone else find themselves shouting things like "if you just gave me a chance we could be great together!" at their screen?

/edit
Also, do you lads still msg people you find attractive and ignore any notion of "leagues"?
If they reply great, if not mneah?

Absolutely no point in messaging somebody you're not attracted to.

I don't care if that sounds shallow. Sexual attraction is mandatory for anything that could become a relationship. Obviously, personality is important (for me, it's actually more important than looks), but I certainly wouldn't message somebody I wasn't attracted to.

As for the response rate - I'm female and 'young' so I seem to be part of the denomination that is inundated with messages. I'm gonna be honest, I'd imagine 2 out of 50 to be a pretty standard rate. Out of 100 messages, I'd usually respond to 3 or 4 tops. There are only so many conversations one can hold at one time!

knucklehead6

mood wrote: »

Don't waste you time emailing women who you wouldn't be a match for (in the age bracket they have stated, location, want the same things etc). That would be a waste of time IMO.

I don't think that's what he was getting at mood.

I know that I've mailed women who would be regarded as "too good looking for me" and I say feck it, she's single, I'm single, what's the worst that could happen.

mood

LyndaMcL wrote: »

Absolutely no point in messaging somebody you're not attracted to.

I don't care if that sounds shallow. Sexual attraction is mandatory for anything that could become a relationship. Obviously, personality is important (for me, it's actually more important than looks), but I certainly wouldn't message somebody I wasn't attracted to.

As for the response rate - I'm female and 'young' so I seem to be part of the denomination that is inundated with messages. I'm gonna be honest, I'd imagine 2 out of 50 to be a pretty standard rate. Out of 100 messages, I'd usually respond to 3 or 4 tops. There are only so many conversations one can hold at one time!

And so many messages form unsuitable guys.

mood

knucklehead6 wrote: »

I don't think that's what he was getting at mood.

I know that I've mailed women who would be regarded as "too good looking for me" and I say feck it, she's single, I'm single, what's the worst that could happen.

I know thats not what he was asking about but it is important I think.

knucklehead6

mood wrote: »

I know thats not what he was asking about but it is important I think.

True. Has to be taken into account.

mood

knucklehead6 wrote: »

True. Has to be taken into account.

You wouldn't believe how many men ignore it :rolleyes:

Then they probably come on here or some other forum to bitch about a lack of replies.

knucklehead6

mood wrote: »

You wouldn't believe how many men ignore it :rolleyes:

Then they probably come on here or some other forum to bitch about a lack of replies.

I may have been slightly guilty of that once or twice. A girl might say up to age 36 and for 2 weeks after my 37th birthday I sent a message or 2 lamenting not seeing their profile 2 weeks previously. Got 1 reply which turned to banter and nothing more. But yeah, not normally a good move.

mood

knucklehead6 wrote: »

I may have been slightly guilty of that once or twice. A girl might say up to age 36 and for 2 weeks after my 37th birthday I sent a message or 2 lamenting not seeing their profile 2 weeks previously. Got 1 reply which turned to banter and nothing more. But yeah, not normally a good move.

That is very different from someone who wants ONS emailing someone who obviously doesn't or someone way beyond the stated age range emailing etc.

awec

This post has been deleted.