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.
Again, I'm not saying that anyone has to give anyone else 1, or 2 or 10,000 chances.
I'm just saying that the filters aren't perfect, and there's no real way (since eliminated people are, you know, eliminated) to know how bad (or good) the filters are.
I will comment further on this.
GIGO
Garbage In, Garbage Out
Making decisions based on poor information, leads to poor decisions.
A person can decide, "I won't date someone who wears yellow on the first date". That doesn't make that a successful criteria.
And it would be a silly example, because that isn't a realistic preference or criteria reflective of the dating culture. Realizing your date smokes when they didn't disclose that information, or drinks more often than they claimed, isn't who they claimed, misrepresented a detail or two or three, or any number of things, is reason enough to eliminate said individual from "worthy" suitors or candidates.
You can do a lot of information gathering by being observant, astute and discerning in the decision-making process. I wouldn't care if said smoker, or dude who drinks frequently, or lied about x, y or z, or acted like douchenozzle, is a "good" partner in some other aspect, because certain traits exclude him from being a good partner for me. Certain pieces of information are enough to deduce if they're compatible on a basic level.
You also don't get to decide what constitutes "poor information" for other people.
And it would be a silly example, because that isn't a realistic preference or criteria reflective of the dating culture.
I think it's a fine example
It's not much more relevant than "I didn't feel chemistry after 5 minutes", or they were "awkward after the first 5 minutes"
Quote:
Realizing your date smokes when they didn't disclose that information, or drinks more often than they claimed, isn't who they claimed, misrepresented a detail or two or three, or any number of things, is reason enough to eliminate said individual from "worthy" suitors or candidates.
You can do a lot of information gathering by being observant, astute and discerning in the decision-making process. I wouldn't care if said smoker, or dude who drinks frequently, or lied about x, y or z, or acted like douchenozzle, is a "good" partner in some other aspect, because certain traits exclude him from being a good partner for me. Certain pieces of information are enough to deduce if they're compatible on a basic level. [/quote]
I agree.
But, again, you're not talking about the topic - chemistry.
Quote:
You also don't get to decide what constitutes "poor information" for other people.
I haven't claimed such.
My claim is that people don't know for themselves what bad information is, because if they exclude a person for some reason, they'll never know if that was a good or bad decision.
I think it's a fine example
It's not much more relevant than "I didn't feel chemistry after 5 minutes", or they were "awkward after the first 5 minutes"
Who said anything about making such assessments within five minutes of meeting? Nice strawman.
Quote:
But, again, you're not talking about the topic - chemistry.
Which can include a variety of tangible and intangible traits. So, yes, these things can be a factor in determining overall chemistry. And chemistry is not experienced or perceived the same way by all individuals, so it isn't up to you to decide what is or isn't chemistry.
Quote:
I haven't claimed such.
Sure you did.
Quote:
GIGO
Garbage In, Garbage Out Making decisions based on poor information, leads to poor decisions.
You assumed the decisions are based on poor information. I'm saying it's a baseless assumption.
Quote:
My claim is that people don't know for themselves what bad information is,
They know their preferences, criteria, what they're attracted to, positive vibes influenced by hormones, warm fuzzy feelings, etc. That's how decisions can be made, and it's for each individual to decide if the information they're assessing leads to the right decision.
Quote:
bad because if they exclude a person for some reason, they'll never know if that was a good or bad decision.
And I'm saying if they were excluded for whatever reason(s), they weren't a good match for that reason(s). What ifs needn't factor here. If I wasn't feeling a date for x, y or z, or all of the above, they already aren't a good match, no matter what other "good" traits they possess. They can be better appreciated by someone else. I didn't need or want to take it further if there was no interest in taking it further.
Also, is that "some reason" chemistry, as you state, or something that can influence chemistry? Like the way they smell, communicate, laugh, smile, body language, eye contact, sound of their voice, etc., or other bits and pieces of information that we assess simultaneously?
Is the "some reason" off chemistry, or other factors, and how can you decide if the decision to eliminate is a bad one? Because they didn't extend the invite for a second date to see that Joe Blow is a really good cook, is an elite athlete, likes dogs, is super close with his fam? By eliminating him after the first date, all of these cool traits and characteristics would be missed. He could even be a nice hand-holder. Or, maybe not, because the decision to eliminate could outweigh all those other traits, which may not even matter to that particular person.
So what? That's them. Why do you even care how they make their dating and relationship decisions? And you weren't just responding to their posts, you were addressing chemistry as a whole as the thread progressed, not just insta-chemistry.
Quote:
I am, and probably most people in this thread are, getting tired of this conversation.
Here's a thought. Stop participating.
Quote:
So, if you're not going to participate fully then I won't continue.
If you're going to continue relying on your narrow and subjective perception of chemistry to make judgments concerning other people's dating happenings, then maybe you should rethink your participation in the thread.
Does anyone understand some women, because i dont. I went on a date with a woman i met from online dating site. SHe seemed nice so we met at a restaurant, i paid for her meal. So when we met, she seemed to give off this energy that was a little negative, but as we talked more she seemed pretty cool. I asked her questions and she answered them well, i asked her if this whole thing is ok and she said yes it is. i was kind of looking the other way as if i could not think of much to say, but as time went on i started opening up. She started to seem cool as time went on, i asked her basic things and she seemed like she was not giving off bad vibes. but here is the thing, at the end of the date, she gave off this energy that was distant\negative. she said she has to go, i said ok see you. I texted her, and she said that she felt no chemistry and she did not want to go further and wishes me well, but it made no sense at all to me because she does not know me. she fails to see who i am and what i can do, it makes me think that she is going off of looks. i dont get it
This happened to me too. she said she felt no romantic chemistry. I think this was just another way to say that she did not find me physically attractive. Chemistry is not everything. In matter of fact the past two dates had not developed chemistry with me. Than again both of these women where out of shape, and probably needed a man that desires them. I live in NYC, and plenty of women want to be taken by hot guys even ugly and fat ones. You need to understand that women are emotional creatures and women don't think logically like us men do. For me Chemistry does not mean squat. It is nice to have chemistry with someone, but what if that person is not responsible, lacks integrity, Charisma religiosity, intellect. Can I put up being with a woman like that for the rest of my life? No. On the flip side someone do not mind this and will put up with great chemistry and lack of compatibility. You see me as a guy, I get to grow to like a woman and appreciate her more overtime instead of right that second.
But let me get back to the topic, women are emotional creatures and don't think things through. They tend to think from the gut. I had two women recently that said they did not have chemistry with me. At least they told me soon, instead of wasting my time, but then again I live in NYC, and women know what they want and want what like now. When women reach her 30s such things as looks, or money is no longer a main criteria. Women began to put other things in the mix when looking for men, it might be looks, or intellect, spirituality, emotional levels of chemistry. I'm going to let you know that all is not lost. Some women can look over chemistry. I remember one time I broke up a fight during a date that was going down hill. I broke up a fight between two young teens, and my date like that. She saw I had compassion for people. She liked what I did and wanted to go out with me again, and she wanted to see me more. But my job schedule ruined our moments of together from growing. Last year a woman told me that she had no chemistry with me and she could not feel where I was. She could not pin point me and did not want to date me. A year later she asked me out on a date. The reason why she asked me out is that she went on relationships with guys that had instant spark with, but on the flip side had no spark with her. These relationships did not work out to well, and now she wants to focus on compatibility and possibly allowing chemistry to grow. But again, I decided not to date her because she wasted my time. She should have gave me a 2nd date a year prior and not a year later.
Last, I want to commend the women on here who say that they met their husbands or boyfriends on first 5 minutes of a spark. Example is metaphyisque. She said Chemistry works for her. Not for nothing that's good for you and I'm happy for you. For majority of Americans, it does not work out like this. Even Evan Marc Katz have said that Chemistry is not important and compatibility is far more important than chemistry. Gosh, if I have sparks for a guy in 5 minutes and suck the living life out of his body, he better have the same spark for me.
Last edited by Bronxguyanese; 06-04-2017 at 11:45 PM..
You need to understand that women are emotional creatures and women don't think logically like us men do.
...
But let me get back to the topic, women are emotional creatures and don't think things through.
... I figured I should not waste your time with my emotional, illogical ramblings.
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.
