Comments on: Wacky Business Idea #3: A New Form of Dating Site

By: How to Increase the Odds of Getting Anything You Want

How to Increase the Odds of Getting Anything You Want — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:15:35 +0000

[...] to dating, I truly believe its a numbers game. I think anyone who is unhappily single just needs to go on more dates, and keep going on them until you click with someone. The love of your life isn’t going to [...]

By: Aussie Personals » Blog Archive » Comment on Wacky Business Idea #3: A New Form of Dating Site by …

Wed, 18 Jun 2008 09:26:44 +0000

[...] Mark Brooks wrote an intriguing post today onHere’s a little tasterI think that your idea for a new online dating site definitely has potential, as it would inherently screen out people who were just interested in photos or brief descriptive statements. Having a more select pool of participants who … [...]

By: Quietrose

Quietrose — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 02:18:13 +0000

Good post, Mr. Cheap, as always!

One of the online dating websites (eHarmony.com) has something like what you are suggesting, but I don’t believe that they use collaborative filtering. They state that they match people based on personality characteristics and such, but then they “guide” you through the process. There are like 4-5 steps before you get to the point of getting an email address or a phone number of the person you are interested in. One of the steps gives you various questions, including a chance to write your own question, to the person you are interested in. I don’t believe that eHarmony matches you based on these questions, but merely encourages more in-depth connections via the questions.

I think that your idea for a new online dating site definitely has potential, as it would inherently screen out people who were just interested in photos or brief descriptive statements. Having a more select pool of participants who were more motivated would be a real advantage to the meat market sites, like the ones you mentioned. (And in my opinion, while OkCupid has tests to attract people, they are superficial and silly most of the time, and don’t seem much different from database online dating sites.)

By: Mr. Cheap

Mr. Cheap — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 01:07:09 +0000

TMW: Plug in man, meeting people the old fashioned way is *SO* old fashioned!

I was as shocked as anyone that that post didn’t work .

By: Thicken My Wallet

Thicken My Wallet — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 23:28:41 +0000

What happened to meeting people the old fashioned way?

The on-line dating scene has become very competitive and fragmented. It may be an idea 2 years too late in the game.

Mr. Cheap- what? You have no blushing bride from that post?!? What is the world coming to…

By: Jo

Jo — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 20:19:09 +0000

I suspect on-line dating works best in large urban areas where people don’t otherwise speak with strangers (I was in TO a few weekends ago and had an impression that people were just a little more disconnected from one another v. my mid-sized city.. mostly everyone on the subway looked a little depressed to be truthful). Around these parts young singles seem to meet up playing ultimate frisbee or through a friend of a friend. So old-fashioned I know…

By: Nobleea

Nobleea — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:17:31 +0000

As someone who’s frequented dating sites for a fair amount of time, I don’t know if this idea would fly. With so many ’selections’ available, they all become generic after a while. The profiles are really what draw you in. Something that is well written, shows their personality, and a bit of sense of humour.

I’ve thought about writing a book about my internet dating experiences, but I think the market has changed too much that it wouldn’t be topical.

What you are suggesting sounds more like a social networking site. Or even an actively managed speed dating endeavor. It’s tough to get a sense of their sense of humour and personality in a few questions. Plus it would seem too much like an interview.

I met my fiance off lavalife. I’m going to ask them to sponsor our wedding as we were interviewed on local tv extolling the virtues. I know at least two other married couples who have lavalife to thank. I think plentyoffish is the big one now, and a good friend has met a really good girl off there.

By: squawkfox

squawkfox — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:14:39 +0000

I seemed to have missed the whole internet dating scene. I found being a woman studying computer science put some serious odds in my favor…for finding a male computer geek. To be honest, I really stuck out in class.

By: Mr. Cheap

Mr. Cheap — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:03:30 +0000

Jo: You’re totally right that it would attract smart cookies (or at least drive off people who aren’t smart cookies), and that’s part of the strength of it! If you had a site that just said “for smart people only” it would probably attract people who who had high opinions of themselves rather than genuinely bright people. This lets them PROVE it.

I think people might be more willing to fill out questions if they were interacting with three people they are potentially interested in, rather than just sitting down for 15-20 minutes filling out a profile. You could be right though…

A frugal dating site is a good idea! “The Millionaire Next Door” talks about how wealthy people often marry people more frugal than they are. You could promote it along those lines…

If you haven’t tried dating on-line, you totally should (assuming you’re single ). I’m amazed that there’s still a stigma associated with it, but for the life of me I can’t figure out how else people meet to start dating.

Alas yes, I’m single. I wrote up this post, but haven’t gotten any responses yet.

By: Jo

Jo — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 14:24:52 +0000

Interesting post MC. I don’t know the first thing about dating sites so take my comments with a grain of salt. I suspect you are right that to an extent at least a lot of single ppl don’t know what they want. It’s a lovely concept that through the q’s and a’s people could connect with others whom they might have otherwise filtered out. But if the info entered was minimal (not sure how this would work with the collaborative filtering you propose) you might have to read and write a lot of answers to questions before you stumbled upon someone you were remotely interested in. Wouldn’t the people who hate filling out profiles also hate writing all those answers to questions? It could be a lot more work I guess. I think I’d rather spend time on a profile at the front end, though I guess I’d fall into the category of having a sense of the kind of fella I’d connect with. Also, this sounds awful, but I’m not sure many people can carry themselves at length on the strength of the written word alone. The upside could be that you’d attract some smart cookies to your site.. people who are hesitant or loathe to try traditional dating sites. But then why not just set up a site exclusive to people that can pass the interesting, smart person test? I have no idea whether those already exist… Is there a site for frugal singles?? I just googled and couldn’t find one.. now that would be something users would be encouraged to go on free dates – meeting in the park for a walk or bike ride, renting a DVD from the library, bringing a thermos of iced tea and meeting at the waterfront – I could go on!

By the way, MC, for the benefit of your readers – does this mean that you’re single? You don’t have to answer that of course.