Furthermore the founder wasn't a dick to you in his comment. So all in all, I'm not sure trashtalking him/OKC is going to help you.
Notice how PG always thanks his proofreaders, even for seemingly short and pointed blog posts.
This whole post smacks of arrogance. Essentially you want us to pat you on the back for giving a big, public “F you” to a competitor because you ASSUME that him wanting to chat means they want to acquire you? If this is how you act in casual online encounters then I’m starting to understand why online dating hasn’t worked out for you.
I read the initial post and thread about it and was skeptical, but my thought was mostly along the lines of "go for it! There must be a way to significantly improve online dating, and I certainly don't have any better ideas."
Now I just think he's a dick, though, and emotionally root for his failure. Why the hell be nasty to someone for no reason except free PR?
Frankly the post confused me at first because when I used okcupid a year or two ago I found it to be easily the best tool available for what it does, and the post claimed there was a consensus that okcupid was terrible.
My friend, to start with you should learn a little bit about women psychology...
Online dating != Picking up items in an online store
Good resolution, good lighting, and bright colors. Fixing that can immediately significantly improve response rates (or give a response rate, as the case may be).
http://media.aerosociety.com/aerospace-insight/2012/11/23/vi...
If a company was purely motivated by profit, I imagine that some clever use of ML would reveal an optimal ($ wise) timeframe for matching a user with their eventual mate (assuming their matching algorithm was perfect), and it wouldn't be 'as soon as possible'.
Too soon and you're missing valuable revenue, too late and the user gets frustrated and quits. Do companies do this? Probably not. As matching algorithms become more advanced and more people use online dating though...
The companies complained that their algorithm was too good and that users would leave the search portal too quickly without seeing any advertising.
It was obvious to Page and Brin that this was stupid - pushing them to start Google.
I use AdultFriendFinder myself, and if I only go by profiles and messages and MSN/Yahoo/etc. chat, then it's easy to get 50 out of 50 girls in a week not actually be willing to meet and only be after getting me to register on a site for their kickback.
I've never been asked to do that on AFF's internal chat/webcam option, however. So even though profiles and messages and mainstream chat are a heck of a lot easier, I never do them any more. If a site can cut out the spam accounts, they could have that easier service in a workable form.
Although I see the potential for this.
Email me.
