= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MrMind comments on Open thread, Jan. 18 - Jan. 24, 2016 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (201)
Are you good looking? What kind of relationship are you searching for? Where do you live?
I'm average. Monogamous. U.S.
I'm looking for more of a meta analysis, though.
Generally, my experience has been that ease of access is negatively correlated with the overall positivity of my experience.
Pay sites seem to eliminate a lot of insincere people, where apps like Tinder (free and almost instant setup) attract many flaky people, making it almost unusable in my experience.
Then I would say that your analysis is correct: in my experience, Tinder and the like are more suited to the good looking, younger and fling-searching crowd, in your case you'd be better off with Match. com and eHarmony.
My experience is that pay sites are geared most towards signaling professionalism and (moderate) wealth -- which is often shorthand for 'adult', and therefore useful. However, in my experience OKCupid has provided better signaling for intelligence and thoughtfulness, simply because it allows users to write commentary on any question you answer. Most users do not take advantage of this, but looking for 'explained answers' is one of the most useful metrics I have found on any dating site.