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.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,974,024 times
Reputation: 40635
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by DennyCrane
Did OKC publish these point values? I had no idea mandatory was weighted so much more than very important. I guess it makes sense though. Makes me want to clear my answers and start over.
Yes, the methodology was published by them. It is still on their site.
One thing I don't like is how calculate your match to someone else.
To get a match percentage for you and B, we just multiply your satisfactions, and then take the square root: sqrt(91% * 98%) = 94%.
That means if someone's answers were 91% satisfactory, OKC would tell me the person is a 94% match. In other words, they're inflating the match score because she liked my answers more I liked hers. Shouldn't the lower score be the true match score?
One thing I don't like is how calculate your match to someone else.
To get a match percentage for you and B, we just multiply your satisfactions, and then take the square root: sqrt(91% * 98%) = 94%.
That means if someone's answers were 91% satisfactory, OKC would tell me the person is a 94% match. In other words, they're inflating the match score because she liked my answers more I liked hers. Shouldn't the lower score be the true match score?
Interesting. Yes, I think they need not inflate match ratings, as they are difficult enough to interpret.
I know we disagree on it, but I at least expect to have a decent amount in common with someone who has a 95% or higher match rating. I shouldn't be leaving the date thinking "WTH was that".
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,974,024 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by DennyCrane
That means if someone's answers were 91% satisfactory, OKC would tell me the person is a 94% match. In other words, they're inflating the match score because she liked my answers more I liked hers. Shouldn't the lower score be the true match score?
Well that is a rather glass half full perspective.
So they pretty much admit, without explicitly saying it, that their match system is pointless. It's really the suggestion of being a good match that affects people's response to someone. This means their system is needlessly filtering out people who may indeed be attractive & even compatible to you.
Well, it's pointless for those who only rely on the displayed percentage. People are boohooing about being fooled into thinking they were connecting with "compatible" matches when they weren't. What right-minded person doesn't bother cross-checking the supposed match's answers to see how that individual answered important questions, or the ones that matter to them?
If it's displayed at 90%, but it's really 30%, it should be more than obvious once you glance or skim over the questionnaire. I'd have no problem spotting obvious discrepancies. Even the text of the profile would give it away, and quite easily. The difference between a 45% match and a 95% match were glaringly obvious to me.
Quote:
OKCupid never gave me more than a 65% match with anyone once I had answered many questions. So for me, it meant many men were being discouraged from messaging me because of the pointless match system which suggested I was not compatible with anyone.
But it isn't pointless to everyone, or those who simply regard it as a tool and one way to assess mutual agreement in key areas. I used a handful of dating sites at different times, and OKC was hands down my favorite, and the one I had the most success with. The match percentage has been a fairly accurate predictor of compatibility in worldview and lifestyle for me. But there are a lot of factors and variables when it comes to one's matches. Their region/area plays a big part in it as well. I played around at times and widened my search to "everywhere" just to see who else was out there. I talked to a variety of people from different locations, and those I was highly matched with shared their experiences within their area. Some experiences were good, others okay and some were not so great. All of my highest matches, the high 90's, were predominantly in metro/progressive cities.
The system matches people with how they answered questions, and how closely or similarly they answered questions in relation to those in their area. I've had lower matches that were only low due to how the member answered questions in a specific area. I've seen low matches where the questions that likely brought the percentage down was due to inconsistency in answering questions within the same worldview or section, and also how important or relevant the topic is. Like when a person answers a question by saying they're "not religious," but then another question reveals a belief that contradicts that or shows they're biased toward antiquated concepts or views that stem from religion. If their views are not consistent no doubt the match percentage will reflect that, especially if others of their target group show more consistency in their answers.
And some people simply don't answer truthfully or don't know what they hell to choose or where they really stand on certain matters.
Quote:
And the questions themselves were awful. The answer options conform to such narrow stereotypes of the mentalities out there (similar to political spectrums; some of us fall nowhere on it) & often using false dichotomies. Most of the time I'd need an "other" option & to write an essay in response.
Yeah, I didn't like OKCupid....online dating for me is just a big NO-NO all around.
I agree in part. I answered "other" quite a bit. A lot of the questions are user submitted. I wrote a response to a lot of the questions to provide a clearer explanation. The questions that required an explanation on my part, I preferred it that way, as I don't do ambiguity, and prefer to make it known where I stand in areas that matter a great deal. And the areas that matter a lot to me, well, I did see it as a black or white issue. Under no circumstances would I pursue or show interest in someone with a worldview completely antithetical to my own.
Interesting. Yes, I think they need not inflate match ratings, as they are difficult enough to interpret.
I know we disagree on it, but I at least expect to have a decent amount in common with someone who has a 95% or higher match rating. I shouldn't be leaving the date thinking "WTH was that".
My friend sent me a link to this article with the comment maybe this explains how I ended up a 98% match with a "God fearing, gay hating, father of three" when my profile states I'm not religious, I don't have nor want kids and my questions indicate I'm gay-friendly (I became ordained so I can officiate a gay wedding later this year).
We did answer a lot of the questions the same due to both being more on the conservative side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4DM1N
It is appealing, I just usually don't have much time to go through more than a few questions per person. I hardly have time to do laundry and cook myself dinner, let alone this. Know what I mean?
I like that there's an option to search for topics if we've both answered a lot of questions and I don't want to wade through all of them. I search for the deal breakers and go from there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by orangeapple
OKCupid never gave me more than a 65% match with anyone once I had answered many questions. So for me, it meant many men were being discouraged from messaging me because of the pointless match system which suggested I was not compatible with anyone.
Over Easter weekend, I created a profile on eHarmony as it was a free communication weekend. The majority of my matches have the disclaimer about being a great match who is a little out of my settings or whatever it says, mostly because of them having children. I answered a lot of the questions on that site and the highest match I've seen is 63%. Most are in the 50% range, with 53% seemingly the most common.
I didn't pay for a subscription so I can't see my matches and I rarely log into the account. It's been a couple of weeks-or maybe even longer since I last logged in, which was to get some data to respond to a post here. I've had a bad experience with them in the past, so I won't pay again but this morning I got an email "Daniel" is interested-most likely a fake profile they are using to lure me in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DennyCrane
How come the mobile app lets me mark questions as mandatory, but the desktop version doesn't?
I was wondering this too. I thought they did away with mandatory as an option. There are some questions I answered on my desktop I definitely would have marked as mandatory if given the option but I don't care enough to go back and re-answer everything on my phone.
When I created my account, my maximum avg visitors per week was 113. Now it's down to 16. I haven't received a message since 6/20 and I'm okay with that. (Well, I got an invitation from them to help moderate the site on 7/24 that I just saw). I've got other stuff going on right now so I've pushed this to the back burner and haven't been making an effort on my end.
And the questions themselves were awful. The answer options conform to such narrow stereotypes of the mentalities out there (similar to political spectrums; some of us fall nowhere on it) & often using false dichotomies. Most of the time I'd need an "other" option & to write an essay in response.
There's a lot of questions I've skipped over because my only options to answer them were "yes" or "no".
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.
I've had a bad experience with them in the past, so I won't pay again but this morning I got an email "Daniel" is interested-most likely a fake profile they are using to lure me in.
