Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you are doing none of those things, but are sending articulate, well thought out messages that show you've read a woman's profile, then yes, you SHOULD get a response, even if it's a polite "No thank you."
Hahahahahahahahaha!!!
That just isn't how it works. It doesn't bother me as I've been doing this for five years now on-and-off, and it's pretty much par for the course.
The online dating system is broken, IMO. There's just no way to create any substantial form of attraction, both physically and in terms of interests & personality. Online, I feel downright repulsive and uncompelling... something that I don't feel anywhere else I exist in life.
When I had an OKC profile last year, I put in it that I would respond to all messages, even if only to say that I was not interested, and I did. Most men were appreciative of that.
I reactivated my profile last month, but re-wrote it completely and added new pics. Got a message from this guy that looked to me like a cut-and-paste message, so I ignored it - there was nothing interesting in his profile or what he messaged me, lots of talk about his kids, his "morals," and to message him back if "your a good women."
Yesterday the guy sent me the exact same message - down to the number of exclamation marks - so I responded and told him that he clearly hadn't read my profile, and I figured it was a cut and paste message sent to everyone, and that I was not interested.
Here is his exact response: " Whatever ***** !! good luck at the dog pound i was throwing u a bone "
And that, gentlemen, is why many women don't respond to your messages online.
See, that's when I report the profile.
Something like that happened to me years ago, where a guy too far away kept writing to me on what was then Yahoo personals. I specifically stated that I didn't have a car and was looking for someone close to D.C. He got bent that I ignored him, so I sent him a canned "no thank you, we live too far apart." He wrote back that he had a car, he could make the trip in 30 minutes, and that I needed to "grow a brain."
My response to him was, "I see by your nasty, verbally abusive reaction that I made the right choice in rejecting you." Send, report, block.
That just isn't how it works. It doesn't bother me as I've been doing this for five years now on-and-off, and it's pretty much par for the course.
The online dating system is broken, IMO. There's just no way to create any substantial form of attraction, both physically and in terms of interests & personality. Online, I feel downright repulsive and uncompelling... something that I don't feel anywhere else I exist in life.
Sad to say but I feel the same way. I initially thought MoonBeam's strategy was the only way to go about it; highlight similarities, make some light hearted jokes, put some thought into the message so it stands out from all the "hey bab3 wan to bleep 2nite?" messages women are bombarded with on a daily basis. After over a year of trying to make it work, I finally cracked and went to shotgun mode (obviously not as bad as the aforementioned message, but limiting the message to about one paragraph).
This method finally netted me a few dates here and there, and eventually a few month long relationship with someone who wasn't really compatible at all, but I simply went along with it because I hadn't dated in so long I felt I was regressing socially. After the inevitable demise of that little tryst, it's been crickets on OLD. It's frustrating because it seems that the thoughtful approach doesn't yield results (unless one is willing to spend literally hours on it, because that would be the only way to get both quality and quantity), and the shotgun approach yields marginally more results but with people who, unsurprisingly, you don't share chemistry or common interests with. Perhaps if I were trying to connect with women who were older it would be easier, but I'm pretty sure for most women in their late 20s/early 30s the idea of dating some 23 year old college kid renting a tiny apartment isn't appealing at all, especially when they have access to the pool of men who are older, more mature (in a financial and emotional sense), and more experienced not just in life in general but also sexually speaking.
Perhaps if I were trying to connect with women who were older it would be easier, but I'm pretty sure for most women in their late 20s/early 30s the idea of dating some 23 year old college kid renting a tiny apartment isn't appealing at all, especially when they have access to the pool of men who are older, more mature (in a financial and emotional sense), and more experienced not just in life in general but also sexually speaking.
In my experience, I'd say not in the least! That's my target market as that's where I am in life (though, I cast a wide net either way), and it's utter crickets. I'd love to tell you maturity and a decent income helps, but it doesn't. You'd think women in their 30s would be more eager to AT LEAST chat with baggage-free, serious-about-relationships men like myself.
From what I gather from this thread, they'd rather bicker with clownhouses that are conflictive, and spend time reporting and complaining about them, instead of focusing on those making an effort to honestly engage them on a mature level. I hope this isn't the norm, because no one's doing anyone any favors feeding the trolls. This is Internet rule number one.
Sad to say but I feel the same way. I initially thought MoonBeam's strategy was the only way to go about it; highlight similarities, make some light hearted jokes, put some thought into the message so it stands out from all the "hey bab3 wan to bleep 2nite?" messages women are bombarded with on a daily basis. After over a year of trying to make it work, I finally cracked and went to shotgun mode (obviously not as bad as the aforementioned message, but limiting the message to about one paragraph).
Speaking of, some guy from your neck of the woods sent me something today that said only "say yes to me."
Speaking of, some guy from your neck of the woods sent me something today that said only "say yes to me."
My response was a link to this:
He did not write back.
Hehe. The sad thing is though, some women, at some point, must have said yes to him, because otherwise he wouldn't be using such a message. Sheer volume trumps stupidity. I actually knew an IT guy who got so fed up with copy pasting that he programmed this spam poke bot that views hundreds of profiles a day as a way of advertising his (on OKC when you visit someone's profile they are notified, unless you are a premium user.) That way he didn't even have to write any messages, because eventually his bot would stumble onto a woman who actually was sufficiently interested to message him first.
I actually knew an IT guy who got so fed up with copy pasting that he programmed this spam poke bot that views hundreds of profiles a day as a way of advertising his (on OKC when you visit someone's profile they are notified, unless you are a premium user.) That way he didn't even have to write any messages, because eventually his bot would stumble onto a woman who actually was sufficiently interested to message him first.
That just isn't how it works. It doesn't bother me as I've been doing this for five years now on-and-off, and it's pretty much par for the course.
The online dating system is broken, IMO. There's just no way to create any substantial form of attraction, both physically and in terms of interests & personality. Online, I feel downright repulsive and uncompelling... something that I don't feel anywhere else I exist in life.
I know, I know. It would be nice if that's the way it worked though.
In my experience, I'd say not in the least! That's my target market as that's where I am in life (though, I cast a wide net either way), and it's utter crickets. I'd love to tell you maturity and a decent income helps, but it doesn't. You'd think women in their 30s would be more eager to AT LEAST chat with baggage-free, serious-about-relationships men like myself.
From what I gather from this thread, they'd rather bicker with clownhouses that are conflictive, and spend time reporting and complaining about them, instead of focusing on those making an effort to honestly engage them on a mature level. I hope this isn't the norm, because no one's doing anyone any favors feeding the trolls. This is Internet rule number one.
So, the consensus is that machine-gunning impersonal copy pasta is the only way to successfully communicate with women in online dating?
No, no that's not the consensus.
We're not feeding the trolls, we're telling them to **** off and then blocking and reporting them. They are wasting OUR time, not the other way around.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It would be nice if that's the way it worked though.
