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.
*Just to make it clear, I'm a woman. I was on OKC on and off for about 2.5 years. The cities I lived in at the time were Atlanta, So and Nor Cal. I am 29. My search parameters were men between 34-44. Aside from maybe two cases, I didn't go out with anyone with a match rating below 85-90%. I preferred 90s.*
I follow this rule too. Below 85% and there is ALWAYS a major dealbreaker. Sometimes you'll make it out onto a date with them, but eventually that one issue always comes out. It could be anything, but below that 85% threshold, it's a guarantee. At least in my experience.
I prefer 90% and up as well. But that's a tricky thing. I've found when you get over 96-97% you are often TOO compatible. It's like dating your twin. If you're into that, it's great, I guess, but I'm looking for someone who balances me. One dude I met on OKC was a 99% match, and we met up. We got along like a house on fire. Talked up a storm the entire "date." We've become close friends since then, but there is absolutely NO chemistry. Zilch, zero, nada. He eventually moved in with me as a housemate for several months while he was changing careers, and then moved one town over. We joke that we are the siblings we never had (he has a brother, no sister). Every 99% date has been a dud because of the lack of chemistry - it's very strange.
Once you get below 99% though there is a lot of jumping around. I optimized my profile several months back by weeding out all of the unnecessary questions and many of the ones that I believe are just there to establish that you're not a sociopath. I focused on the ones centered around moral beliefs/intellectual outlook and expectations from partners, as those are what I believe are important in a relationship, not to mention a few that are there to establish basic intelligence and key lifestyle preferences.
Before, I had answered whatever question seemed fun and loaded up on things like "do you prefer coffee or tea?" and "what's genre do you prefer?" and it was skewing my results.
After I did the changes, some people who I had had as much as 96% compatibility with dropped to the 70s and others who were in the mid-80s shot up into the high 90s. Interestingly though, the 99% guys stayed pretty much where they were. I'm not a mathematically brained person, so I'm not sure what the reasons were for this, but I'm working on some theories.
Ok, yeah, this is part of the reason I find OKC so fascinating.
I follow this rule too. Below 85% and there is ALWAYS a major dealbreaker. Sometimes you'll make it out onto a date with them, but eventually that one issue always comes out. It could be anything, but below that 85% threshold, it's a guarantee. At least in my experience.
I prefer 90% and up as well. But that's a tricky thing. I've found when you get over 96-97% you are often TOO compatible. It's like dating your twin. If you're into that, it's great, I guess, but I'm looking for someone who balances me. One dude I met on OKC was a 99% match, and we met up. We got along like a house on fire. Talked up a storm the entire "date." We've become close friends since then, but there is absolutely NO chemistry. Zilch, zero, nada. He eventually moved in with me as a housemate for several months while he was changing careers, and then moved one town over. We joke that we are the siblings we never had (he has a brother, no sister). Every 99% date has been a dud because of the lack of chemistry - it's very strange.
Once you get below 99% though there is a lot of jumping around. I optimized my profile several months back by weeding out all of the unnecessary questions and many of the ones that I believe are just there to establish that you're not a sociopath. I focused on the ones centered around moral beliefs/intellectual outlook and expectations from partners, as those are what I believe are important in a relationship, not to mention a few that are there to establish basic intelligence and key lifestyle preferences.
Before, I had answered whatever question seemed fun and loaded up on things like "do you prefer coffee or tea?" and "what's genre do you prefer?" and it was skewing my results.
After I did the changes, some people who I had had as much as 96% compatibility with dropped to the 70s and others who were in the mid-80s shot up into the high 90s. Interestingly though, the 99% guys stayed pretty much where they were. I'm not a mathematically brained person, so I'm not sure what the reasons were for this, but I'm working on some theories.
Ok, yeah, this is part of the reason I find OKC so fascinating.
Those percentages don't mean anything. All about physical attraction
I follow this rule too. Below 85% and there is ALWAYS a major dealbreaker. Sometimes you'll make it out onto a date with them, but eventually that one issue always comes out. It could be anything, but below that 85% threshold, it's a guarantee. At least in my experience.
I prefer 90% and up as well. But that's a tricky thing. I've found when you get over 96-97% you are often TOO compatible. It's like dating your twin. If you're into that, it's great, I guess, but I'm looking for someone who balances me. One dude I met on OKC was a 99% match, and we met up. We got along like a house on fire. Talked up a storm the entire "date." We've become close friends since then, but there is absolutely NO chemistry. Zilch, zero, nada. He eventually moved in with me as a housemate for several months while he was changing careers, and then moved one town over. We joke that we are the siblings we never had (he has a brother, no sister). Every 99% date has been a dud because of the lack of chemistry - it's very strange.
Once you get below 99% though there is a lot of jumping around. I optimized my profile several months back by weeding out all of the unnecessary questions and many of the ones that I believe are just there to establish that you're not a sociopath. I focused on the ones centered around moral beliefs/intellectual outlook and expectations from partners, as those are what I believe are important in a relationship, not to mention a few that are there to establish basic intelligence and key lifestyle preferences.
Before, I had answered whatever question seemed fun and loaded up on things like "do you prefer coffee or tea?" and "what's genre do you prefer?" and it was skewing my results.
After I did the changes, some people who I had had as much as 96% compatibility with dropped to the 70s and others who were in the mid-80s shot up into the high 90s. Interestingly though, the 99% guys stayed pretty much where they were. I'm not a mathematically brained person, so I'm not sure what the reasons were for this, but I'm working on some theories.
Ok, yeah, this is part of the reason I find OKC so fascinating.
I was told in the past to vary the type of questions you answer. If one focuses on more of the whimsical or trivial stuff and less on the meaty questions then it can skew the results. There could be compatibility in respect to these more trivial matters, but less so for the meatier issues.
The first OKC relationship our match percentage was around 86% and enemy around 6%, and we were very much alike in many respects -- like twins. He hadn't answered as many questions as I did. The second relationship, we had a 96% percentage and 1% enemy. He answered quite a few questions, over 500. And the third, we were a 96% match and 7% enemy at the time I messaged him. We had over 1000 questions in common. Then I answered a couple hundred more, questions he answered and I didn't, and it bumped up to 99%. Surprisingly, while we're very similar, there are also enough differences to make things interesting.
I had a lot of 90s matches in Atlanta, and much to my surprise, fewer in So Cal. I had the most high 90s matches in Nor Cal, and the same for D.C., Maryland, NOVA, N.Y., and other metro and progressive cities. When it comes to dating and best matches, metro and progressive cities were best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FBJ
Those percentages don't mean anything. All about physical attraction
In my experience, they mean a lot, like a whole lot. I came across many profiles of attractive men, and yet I had absolutely no interest due to lack of compatibility in our questions and profile. So, no, it is not solely about physical attraction. If it were I'd have "settled" for looks-only over quality and substance in much less time than I spent on dating sites.
Got responses to your messages?
Got messages that turned into actual dates?
Dates turned into actual relationships?
Relationships turned into marriage?
I hear in the online dating world there is a lot of serial dating as people have so much choice they are always of the mindset that there is something better out there, this is especially true for women who get inundated with replies. Do you think there is any truth to this?
I've been on OKC for about 3 weeks but have only had a picture for 2. I didn't really start getting profile views until I posted the picture; my current average for profile views in a week is 78.
1) I've sent messages to four men and got a response from one; the 4th one I sent about an hour ago so that one can still go either way. I've received messages from 16 and I've responded to 10. A couple I just haven't had a chance to respond to and I haven't responded to those who are both a low match percentage and live in another country.
2) Not yet. I was tentatively supposed to meet someone tomorrow but it's long distance and I now have to stay local tomorrow. I got an initial message from someone yesterday asking if I wanted to meet for drinks after work but I didn't see it until it was too late (and I don't drink).
3) No
4) No, but the guy I was supposed to meet tomorrow is already wondering if I have someone to take care of me if down the road he should leave me widowed (again. Been there, down that). To his credit, he did say he was really jumping ahead of things.
I preferred OK Cupid to the other dating sites I was on, although the only downer was that there were noticeably more limited options. What I liked the most was the visible (and sometimes very personal) questions/answers so you can actually screen the people a bit to get an idea of what they are like (providing they are being honest) vs. just reading a profile where someone can write any old thing.
I preferred OK Cupid to the other dating sites I was on, although the only downer was that there were noticeably more limited options. What I liked the most was the visible questions/answers so you can actually screen the people a bit to get an idea of what they are like (providing they are being honest) vs. just reading a profile where someone can write any old thing.
Exactly. The screening ability is what makes it what it is. And I just liked the user interface. Obviously, there are a lot of variables that determine one's options. Region/city, what they're looking for, their target demographic, etc.
I'm sure my "success" would have been different had I lived in a less diverse area, like, say, the South. And not metro city Atlanta South, but the actual South. I'd have fewer things in common with those who are ideologically and culturally Southern. I am better matched with those who are politically, ideologically and socially progressive, which means metro and progressive cities are more my speed. I will find more secularists and liberals in these areas than, say, small town America.
I received a lot of messages from men out of state who widen their search just to see what else is out there, to see if there are better matches in other areas. A lot of these men lived in more conservative areas where they don't exactly fit in.
To my surprise, San Diego didn't have the type of progressive that I am best matched with. It was an odd dating culture, and the least exciting and fun. Just didn't care for it.
But yes, the questions/answers can be very telling. It can help weed people out, to know where they stand on important matters. Yes, it's pretty damn important that a man I take interest in knows the sun is bigger than the earth and accepts the theory of evolution. It's important that he believe in same-sex marriage equality, and teacher-led prayer should not be allowed in public school. There are quite a few biggies that are flat out deal-breakers. They aren't pointless questions for those looking for honest compatibility where it matters to them.
I used to prefer match, but now prefer OKC... yeah, there are more less serious people on OKC just killing time because it is free, but there are also more less boring people on OKC. Match is pretty much vanillaville.
Which sent me running to Match when I read this because a) you have good judgment, and b) I'm already tired of the freakshow on OKC. If it's not kids in their 20s, it's bikers and guys who look like I wouldn't want to run into them alone in an alley. I just don't know what it is with the men in their late 40s to early 50s where I live, though, where so MANY of them have shaved heads and salt-and-pepper goatees, looking like they'd strangle your kitten. They all look the same! I mean, I get that if the hairline is going, sure, go ahead and shave it off. It's not a bad look. But then take some dang Grecian Formula to your beard, trim that blasted thing so you don't look like a homeless person or ZZ Top in training, and SMILE!
And yeah, I'll say what I said last week: A lot of them look one Big Mac away from a coronary. (And anyone who has a problem with that can bite me.)
Boring is good for me right now. Nice, clean-cut, law-abiding, suit-and-tie, vanilla, Howie Long boring.
I dunno. Maybe I'm used to D.C. My sister is having the opposite problem. She is down there now, and she says she can't get over the number of clean-cut, cop-haired men who are are in great shape and are into things like hiking, biking, skiing, rollerblading, white-water rafting, camping, etc. That's military/wonk for ya, though.
BAH, I'm a priss. I know it. I own it. I'll date the vanilla guys and keep my David Draiman fantasies to myself.
Got responses to your messages? Yes
Got messages that turned into actual dates? Yes
Dates turned into actual relationships? Yes
Relationships turned into marriage? Hell no
I'm not a huge fan of OKC, I personally think POF is better because I can get away with a much simpler profile and it's much easier to search out and see last login dates.
Also, those questions are dumb.
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.
