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.
For me, the only justificaton for expanding geographical parameters was when I was planning to move anyway, and said cities were on my short list of possibilities.
In my observations, that's a big part of the "false positive" that comes when people think OLD is like a shopping list.
No one is guaranteed to find a match because even if they do bring all green check marks, the intangible factors or compatibility still play a huge part.
Exactly. He and I talked on the phone and we could not carry on a conversation. It was painful!
My friend is dating someone who is phenomenal for them on paper but says the physical attraction is just not that strong. I've met them and they are great. But I'm guessing if that physical attraction hasn't grown after almost a year, it's not likely to happen! Could be wrong though as they do seem to be growing closer lately.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,938 posts, read 36,935,179 times
Reputation: 40635
I generally don't expand my distances, there is no reason to. I am sometimes open to exceptional matches (95%+) when they contact me, and they live places I get to relatively frequently.
PS: Hollar if you're a cute one in Waterbury, VT or Portland, ME
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWGirl74
Exactly. He and I talked on the phone and we could not carry on a conversation. It was painful!
I've dated several people like this. They're just not phone people. Trying to talk to them is awkward, lots of silences, fumbly... just not good. But in person it is perfect, can talk non stop for hours and hours. There were times we talked and it went great on the phone only to fail badly in person. This is why I don't do pre meeting phone calls, it tells me nothing about compatibility.
I generally don't expand my distances, there is no reason to. I am sometimes open to exceptional matches (95%+) when they contact me, and they live places I get to relatively frequently.
PS: Hollar if you're a cute one in Waterbury, VT or Portland, ME
I've dated several people like this. They're just not phone people. Trying to talk to them is awkward, lots of silences, fumbly... just not good. But in person it is perfect, can talk non stop for hours and hours. There were times we talked and it went great on the phone only to fail badly in person. This is why I don't do pre meeting phone calls, it tells me nothing about compatibility.
I've had the reverse, too, where people are glib on the phone, awkward face to face.
For me, the only justificaton for expanding geographical parameters was when I was planning to move anyway, and said cities were on my short list of possibilities.
Exactly. There's just little point to it if you're not already looking to relocate there. That is ultimately what happened to me last summer. I did a couple of dates about 60 miles from me, but I kinda already knew that wasn't an area I wanted to relocate to. I like the area, but it's not an area I'd really want to move to right now. For me, it's more about moving to a different state and experiencing and absorbing different cultures and different people.
I tried that expand the parameters thing one time and it only created more red tape...
I've dated several people like this. They're just not phone people. Trying to talk to them is awkward, lots of silences, fumbly... just not good. But in person it is perfect, can talk non stop for hours and hours. There were times we talked and it went great on the phone only to fail badly in person. This is why I don't do pre meeting phone calls, it tells me nothing about compatibility.
Understandable. He was great at email, but horrible on the phone. But if I'm going to drive 3 hours to meet someone (6 RT), I want to at least talk to them first. I admit, I was spoiled with LH (and if you remember my only LTR) in that we could talk for hours both on the phone and off. My BFF (male) and I can also talk for hours both on the phone and off. So I guess I have a high and possibly unrealistic standard in this respect.
However, if I'm going to date someone who lives 3 hours away, the day to day is going to be text and phone, so in this case, I would need someone who can carry on a conversation.
Understandable. He was great at email, but horrible on the phone. But if I'm going to drive 3 hours to meet someone (6 RT), I want to at least talk to them first. I admit, I was spoiled with LH (and if you remember my only LTR) in that we could talk for hours both on the phone and off. My BFF (male) and I can also talk for hours both on the phone and off. So I guess I have a high and possibly unrealistic standard in this respect.
However, if I'm going to date someone who lives 3 hours away, the day to day is going to be text and phone, so in this case, I would need someone who can carry on a conversation.
I bolded the keyword in your post. You've declared this as a need, not a want.
I will date someone who lives outside of my preferred radius (20 miles) as long as he's willing to do all of the driving and eventually move to where I am. Unfortunately, I don't feel right asking them to do this so we just don't date.
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.
