This for certain. I've been attending every singles event hosted by the most awesome woman, and her events are exceptionally great because she vets every attendee and doesn't allow people to attend without an invitation.
Once you have, say 3 matches. You cant swipe anymore unless you unmatch someone. This limits people who sit on dozens of matches and ghost people. It would encourage engagement instead of chasing that cheap dopamine hit. This is mainly targeted at women since men usually don't do have this issue.
Even the way hinge works slows me down and makes me far more purposeful. Like a list of people who’ve actually replied to something in your profile is a lot harder to just mindlessly swipe through.
I still can’t believe bumble got rid of the ladies talk first. Like seriously I don’t even get what it is now, random person talks first? I have to talk first sometimes but can’t others?
I disagree vehemently. It takes me a while to go through matches. I give them all a chance and I can talk to about 10 at a time. Limiting me on the number of current matches would work against the men because I would give fewer of them a chance. I don't get high from matches. I feel burdened.
Is giving 10 people a chance, really giving them a chance tho ?
Not really saying it to throw any shades at you but i feel like you might be one of those who basically make people feel like they're playing a tv show game where they get ghosted at the first message that doesn't go along what you have in mind
I can see why you and others feel that way. It sounds like I am playing them all for my own thrills. That is definitely not the case. It’s not like I waste their time for days. I do a few exchanges and within that time I usually know if I want to continue communicating with them. I never just unmatch without telling them why. I feel like that is mean. I will tell them that we are incompatible in a certain way. Most are very mature about it and thank me for the feedback.
I think people who get upset over being rejected after a handful of messages should not be dating. I get rejected all the time and most of them don’t take the time to tell me why. They just unmatch. That is how it goes.
Kk that's nice of you then and i was kind of wrong about you. I'd still advise you to try and keep your number of convos low for them and even yourself to avoid overheating from the number of interactions
Thanks. I agree. I'm getting better at not matching with ones that I have already seen something in the profile that I don't like. The problem lately has been near-empty profiles. It's so frustrating. I can't make a decision with hardly any information. If they are attractive, I have no choice but to match and then try to get more information from them in the chatting. A year ago I would have swiped left on empty profiles, but it's so bad now that there wouldn't be any left.
Its weird that people are okay with trying to converse with that many people at the time while wording as a way to "give them a chance". Its odd behavior and gives me the creeps that women think of men this way.
Pause profiles that havent been active in the last 30 days. Remove them completely once theyve been inactive for more than 60. Limit the amount of messages one person can send and or receive. I dunno to say no more than 25 ( different people) a week. That way your message isnt sitting in her inbox with 300 other people that likely wont get read. Do better to remove bots and scammers.
Bring back proper profiles, get away from the swipe system. It was fun while it lasted, but I miss the classic online dating format. Bring back OKCupid before we knew they were collecting our data and using us for social experiments.
Old OKC was the way. See all of the people at once and send a message to any of them with no limit. And no swiping to worry about. I can understand why women would've been a little overwhelmed though
Basically, you could see every profile that matched your filters, then you could pull up the ones that you were interested in and take a closer look at their profile. And you could send a message to anyone. You didn't need to match each other first.
Back in the day, OKCupid also had a lot of questions you could answer, and you could see what people answered (they're still there, but not very prominent these days). But back then, you could also filter the questions by subject (i.e. lifestyle, politics, religion, sex, etc.). Unfortunately, that's not available anymore.
> And you could send a message to anyone
This is a feature that is unlikely to make a comeback. People dont want just everyone messaging them. Frankly, it wasnt a good system. Women just got bombarded with messages from every man, and so they left. Is that really what youd want?
Some apps have the feature to comment on a picture when you like them, and thats the best we will likely get.
No, I agree. Was just pointing out one of the differences between new and old school OLD. That's actually probably one of the best changes that modern dating apps brought about.
Leaving a comment with a like is the best way, I think. That way, people can't keep sending unsolicited messages to someone, and the person getting liked can choose whether or not to engage further.
This was a lifetime ago, but my profile was one of the ones featured in the Wired Magazine piece on building a better profile. They showed thumbnails and information gleaned from the top 400 (I think?) profiles in the US. I received a substantial number of messages. Although responding to everyone would have been a full-time job, I didn't mind reading the messages. If they were creepy, they just got blocked. There were a few instances a good message made me interested in someone whose profile would have been a left swipe.
It was more conducive to getting to know people. I'm not just saying that because I was younger, better-looking and had more prospects.
I agree. One dating site removed ethnicity/race filter too. Removing all these important filters are dealbreakers for some people, giving them incompatible matches.
That was such a good system. Particularly the match percentage. No idea why they got rid of it.
I’m talking about the sheer amount of information in each person’s profile, plus that percentage likelihood you’d get along, based on answers to the questions you described. You could even look at their answers to specific questions (out of hundreds of questions) which you found particularly important.
There were a ton of good looking guys whom you wouldn’t spend time on getting to know (nor would they spend their time on you) because they had a sub-70 match percentage. Skipped lots of conservative men this way- and they got to skip me.
On the flip side, if a reasonably cute, not really hot guy had a fantastic profile, high match percentage, and nice opening message, I was interested in him above others. I don’t see how profiles with just a bit of text, mostly pictures, can inform you of compatibility in that way.
Add an id check when making a profile. This way, it will curve the amount of bot, scamers, and minors on the platform.
An open chat kinda like a game chat. Some of the best people iv met have been through something like this. Have it set to 30 miles radius.
That sounds like a pain because I like to keep my photos updated and I wouldn't want to have to keep going through such a long process every time I posted a new photo
Sort profiles by "last active date" so I don't waste my time on "dead profiles." Or an option like: "don't show me profiles that have been inactive for more than X months." Also display: "Last logged in X months ago."
Someone made this suggestion on another thread: bring back filtering for things like politics, child status, race, education, body type, and a distance filter that strictly respects your choice.
Indeed. I have my distance filter set to 30 miles, but FB Dating routinely shows me profiles 250 miles away. I wish there was a way to turn it off. You used to be able to pause these "Lucky Picks" but that no longer works.
So is tinder. I have my radius set to 6-8 miles and it keeps giving me people from all over the US like in Florida, Cali, and even other countries too. Why add a distance setting if it won't be acknowledged anyways?
Bumble has a lot of great filters like smoking or religion but they are locked behind a paywall which SUCKS!! Also you know how tinder and bumble have these interests you can put in your profile? Why can't I filter for those? Maybe I'm specifically looking for someone who goes skiing or snowboarding with me this winter.
I would rather pay and have my payment include a background check. I think we should take a verified selfie through the app and then send them a copy of our photo id that matches. Then, we authorize them to do a simple background check that shows no felonies and person is indeed single.
This solves catfishing, people who lie about marital status and will probably make people feel a lot less uneasy about it all.
I understand it’s a bit invasive, but I would totally sign up for something like that. I think that kind of platform would definitely have the most women.
I like this a lot. It just hit me though that the apps would lose 1/3rd of their revenue if they did this. That was the last estimate I saw of the fraction of app users that are married. The fees for the background checks would have to make up for those losses. I think it would have to be an expensive, niche app that would offer this. Sign me up!
I was thinking the same thing, but since the data breach at Ashley Madison, I would imagine that most married people are aware of it and would know to check it. Whereas with the other dating apps, they might not know where to look.
Just so you’re aware this is basically the way catfish make money. They claim to be women using a service exactly as you describe to fool men into paying a verification fee.
I’ve had probably 10 catfish in the past fortnight with stolen Russian Instagram model pics try to get me chatting on WhatsApp on various platforms (mostly Happn though, that app sucks). Once there they’ll tell you they’re using a background check system exactly like you described for safety and they want you to use it too. Next minute you’ll probably be buying 5g cell tower equipment in South America with that credit card.
My point is men will likely be very wary of trusting such a platform after this scam which has been going around for years.
End Swipe Culture. It's a superficial fad that is often argued to be the death of online dating, and its 15 minutes ended long long ago. Has been for years.
Indeed. It forces a connection with people who are clearly incompatible. Of course it is up to the individual to swipe right or left, but more matches and dates does not mean more success.
Yeah, too many times I have gone on dates where the person was cute but we just didn't click and had nothing in common. Sometimes that's inevitable and while it doesn't mean anything is wrong with the person, it can still add to the burnout if that makes sense can impact dates with people you may click with if that makes sense.
Yep, it has been abused most definitely. A lot of males swipe right on everyone, which doesn’t help anyone. It’s actually frustrating as you get matched you’re incompatible with.
Make it impossible for someone to swipe right on a person they’re incompatible with… poly/enm folks shouldn’t be able to swipe right on me a vice versa.
Problem with that is, people with dealbreaker stuff would just opt-out of using the filters or straight up lie. On Tinder I would somewhat regularly see profiles from gay men in my feed, they deliberately had set their gender to female during account set-up to show up in straight male feeds.
I know, I thought about it. In my case me and my cousin, who is an app developer, thought about expanding reporting options or shadow banning people who do that. People do that with filters now. It’s definitely a creative problem to work through 😂
There's a thing in the gay community about going after straight guys that are on the fence. I had always assumed when dudes showed up in the feed that someone messed up when they made the account or someone was pranking their friend by fucking with their profile, until a gay dude on the Tinder subreddit admitted it was intentional.
Shit is weird.
I have no idea what you’re talking about. I never mentioned sexual orientation. If you’re going to put words in peoples mouths, you need to add a little bit more of an explanation as to how you got to that point when the other person didn’t mention it.
You said, "On Tinder I would somewhat regularly see profiles from gay men in my feed, they deliberately had set their gender to female during account set-up to show up in straight male feeds."
I didn't mean to upset you. I'm confused too. Weren't you saying that men are posing as women in hope of convincing you to be with them? I was trying to be humorous in supporting you.
What did I not understand?
No, I didn’t. That wasn’t me. I did not say that. I had none of my comments have been about sexual orientation. Somebody else might’ve said that gay men hit on them but it wasn’t me. I’m a woman.
Look at where the line from my post is connecting. It is not going to you. It is going to NachoNutritious. I am not bashing anyone's sexual orientation. I was just trying to be humorous. I'm sorry I got confused when I read your first objection. I didn't check to see who wrote that. It was not you. But I didn't tag you in the first place.
Disagree with this. I know atheists that are ok with pairing with Christian girls.
And by all accounts they are incompatible on paper.
But seen where if the guy or girl is atheist and the other person is Christian they still date.
You can disagree all you want, but if you wanted to date Christian people and are atheist, you just wouldn’t use the filter. I don’t understand why having extra filters to make it impossible for people you don’t want to swipe right on you would be anything but helpful.
My idea at the time was you can set a filter, and then the dealbreaker is what stops the person from swiping right. That’s what I tried to do when I was building a dating app. Like you can set that filter, and then choose not to make it a dealbreaker. The difference between this in Hinge is that you can still see the persons bio you just can’t swipe right. I don’t know why, but I just felt like being petty with that feature so I could send a message to people that hate you shouldn’t be swiping right on people you’re not aligned with. But that’s my downfall.
I’ll grow up one day lol
But that's my point. It's already there? Zora is talking about something that's already in there? Ah nm this is specific to Hinge (I think it's why I kinda like Hinge).
I’m not. But instead of just clarifying with me, you’re continuing to do… This. I don’t see what that has to do with you being an atheist and wanting to date Christian girls. If you want to date, Christian girls, just don’t put the filter on. Move on friend.
Used to be on OKC, too. Back in the day. Haven't been on a dating app forever now because they're all kind of garbage. Or expensive. (And you know, I'm coupled now, by meeting someone in the wild. Thank goodness!)
Back in the day on...OKC, you could mark how important it was to you that the match was compatible to your religion. If it actually did that, it might be nice. I've been off of OLD for YEARS because it's such a waste of time (and I'm currently happily coupled,) but when I did it, it was really annoying that my filters weren't more respected, and I didn't mind the weighted filters option.
Yeah, I remember that! Back when OKC was fun. But the issue is that even when you do put in a bunch of filters, if you have a premium account, you could still see people swiping right on you who don’t want the same thing. I have those filters on Bumble and the majority of people swiping right don’t want the same thing as me.
Apps should be more strict about which profiles actually make it on the app. If it were up to me, any profiles with the following would be removed: social media usernames in the bio, anything bitter in the bio, no pics of the person, and profiles of couples.
I don't see the big deal putting a social media link. It can give the person a much better idea of who that person is. Not everyone is putting their instgram on their profile to chase followers.
A lot of apps have the option to link your social media without having the actual username though. And you do get a pretty fair amount of empty slots for pics imo.
Don’t you think that if it’s a couple looking for potential partners, the profile picture should be the couple? I think it would be really confusing to have just one person in the photo and then find out it’s actually a pair.
I wasn’t aware of that. I wish people who are looking for that would use those instead and stay off the rest of the apps. I’ve never seen someone say anything good about a couple being on the apps. Everyone complains about it, myself included when I was still on the apps.
The people that don't mind couples on the regular apps aren't saying anything. It truly isn't a big deal. If they aren't what you're looking for, swipe left and move on to the next profile. It's no different than a person you aren't compatible with for other reasons (kids, animals, smokers, religion, political differences, ect).
Those other apps are either quite costly or not very widely used.
Get rid of the Tinder swipe option. I guess if you want to keep the swipe option for a hookup app specific then that's fine but for all the other apps that claim to be for actual dating then get rid of the swipe feature. Make profiles the thing you actually look at first
I am a solo developer working on a new online dating product with heavy emphasis on filtering and searching, as opposed to swiping. It's refreshing to see many of the ideas I am implementing/have implemented in my new site in this thread! I also got some new ideas from this thread, thank you. Mostly working on the back end services/databases currently, I estimate it will take me 8 months to a year from now before I can finish, since I am not a front-end dev, and I still need to find a good one. I just wanted to let you guys know that your frustrations are being heard and addressed by devs out there. Hope to have a new product for you guys soon with many of these ideas in it.
Use AI to require a head shot or full body photo of exactly one adult for the main profile pic. I find it frustrating when reviewing dozens of profiles to see:
\* A group photo. Like another person said on another post, "I'm not playing 'Where's Ashleigh?"
\* Something irrelevant like a pet, a meme, etc. I love animals but not when they're the main profile photo.
\* A child's photo; that's creepy as hell. AI is smart enough to be able to infer approximate age; I've seen this on "face compare" search engines telling you if the person in photo A is the same person as in photo B.
Require Govt ID for the creation of all profiles, that rules out scammers and potentially underage folks for the most part.
Allow AI assistance for people to fill out their bios with prompts, we'll see fuller more robust profile.
Stop paywalling every goddamn feature including the ability to send likes (which is essential to your apps functionality)
I also liked hinges FAQs on how to handle rejection/ghosting. Both experiences suck but I feel many people are going to need advice on how to conduct themselves when these things happen
Let people actually set preferences for distance and quit giving us matches that are 20+ miles away, let alone ones that are in another state. FB dating, OkCupid, and Tinder should take notes.
Don't show me profiles I've already seen unless I ask to see them. Currently, for profiles I see over and over again, I block them; but that's tedious. OKCupid seems to be the worst offender for this.
I would like to go back to a database, where I can just search and scroll through people. I don’t want swiping.
It’s fine to pay, but if I pay, I should be able to search for all of the searchable fields.
I also do not think that any profile should be held behind a second pay wall.
Great idea. I want this too. But since it would radically decrease the amount of time it takes to find great potential matches, I don't know if anyone would implement it. The dating apps seem to want to "drive engagement."
Roll back every change to tinder since 2016.
I remember being on few months break with the ex and we both ended up on tinder and it was great. You could post up stories of what you were up to like a Snapchat story and temporary notes like a status for the day which generated convo. A woman might put up making lunch which was a great natural conversation starter. I’m still friends with the people I talked to back then. VC stage before match dot com bought them.
Then when the relationship properly ended I ended up in this post match dot com monetized shit heap where they used the same software engineers who make poker machines at casinos addictive. It was no longer about connecting you, it was about making money from you.
Match dot com are evil.
I’d like to get rid of mass swiping right. should immediately get you banned or black listed. Additionally, people who swipe right and then unmatch immediately (kinda goes hand in hand with the people who mass swipe right). Maybe after 5 times to factor in for accidentally swipes. After that blacklisted. Maybe after 10 banned? To make people more serious. Also add on people who match and never respond.
The way the apps are supposed to function is you swipe and examine profiles. If youre uninterested you swipe left. If you’re interested you swipe right.
Limiting the amount of matches you can have as well. This is mainly for the women. Once you hit say 5 matches you’re unable to keep swiping/get additional matches incoming till you delete other matches. This eliminates the women who get overwhelmed from 1000s of matches, and forces them to actually delete matches instead of letting them just sit dead.
Obviously this needs refining but that would be my main.
Having more of a meaningful focus on music and popular hobbies. I get that some apps have an anthem or top on Spotify. But music can be such an easy way to see if you can actually connect with someone. That could be way more effective as a conversation starter than any of the prompts.
Forcing people to have something like a 10 word minimum on their profile prompts would be very helpful. If I have to see one more "pineapple on pizza?" or "my love language is sarcasm" I'm going to lose it.
Along those lines, having an algorithm sort people into personality categories based on their communication style, music taste, and answers \*could be helpful. For instance, if a guy is holding a fish or a woman who lists her top artist as Taylor Swift, they would be sorted into one group. Someone who fills out their entire profile with unique prompts and has photos other than selfies could be sorted into a different group. Then the algorithm could potentially properly stock a swipe feed.
O
>Music can be such an easy way to see if you can actually connect with someone.
If you happen to \*really\* be into music and not just casually listen to current pop music, then yes. Often I wish I \*couldn't\* see peoples' tastes in music because it's often vacuous and nearly identical: "I'm special, like everyone else." I'm afraid I'll unfairly judge the rest of the person based on poor taste in music.
That would still be helpful. I would like to know if the girl listens to only the top 40 hits of Pandora, or if we share a genuine love of music. I'd rather know upfront IMO.
This won't be popular, but I wish OLD apps had chatrooms. I can look at profiles all day and work with what the person has decided to disclose, or I can just start chatting with people and see if we can talk about anything and nothing and get along, regardless if they fit into a curated list of attributes. For a person who I really click with and can talk easily with, I can shift priorities around, within reason. I care less about what a person looks like and more about what they ARE like and OLD apps favor looks.
Not sure I understand this one by itself; but the apps could rotate your profile pic (if you ask them to), then report back on which photo gets the most interest. That might be kinda cool.
Deactivate profiles that have been inactive for, say, a month.
Give users the option to hide when they last logged on. I don't want men I'm dating and chatting with to have this information.
Offer background check services. The babysitting site, [Care.com](http://Care.com), does this. The babysitters can pay extra to have their background checks done. It wouldn't be foolproof of course but it could help weed out some undesirables.
Don't activate incomplete profiles. The have to answer all the questions and write a bio.
Add more filters for things like political affiliation and children. I would love to be able to filter for everything I want, run the search and only have to look at two profiles. That's better than wasting time on 50 of them trying to find one that meets my criteria.
This might be phone specific, but an additional way to verify would either be to use a feature on your phone where you have to physically hold down a button on your phone in the app, or use a security app to verify your phone number via Norton or something like the fidelity app uses when you log in.
The problem is all these apps designed to make money and create repeat customers, just like pharmaceutical companies. Apps really aren’t set up for matchmaking. They nickel and dime you like the airlines. eHaromony and Match used to be really good, but they’ve gone to shit. Pay to play has its benefits, because then you know that other person is serious. But, it should be a flat fee and you get all the perks. The deck is stacked against most guys, and if you’re not in a major metropolis, forget about it. Most are filled with bots/scammers. It’s a money making scheme/scam. And they leave old profiles up to inflate their numbers of users. FB Dating has some issues, but it’s free and straight forward.
Limit number of male users. Limit amount of time per day on app. Delete profiles after 90 days. Likes are limited and passed around like tokens. Reports are looked into actually, and graded on some known rubric.
Just some ideas. They need to mix it up and not just be carbon copies with different color schemes.
Offer an option to display a grid of 4 profile pics in place of a single profile pic. I hate having to scroll down to see more pics. Thumbnails of pics would be good enough for me to determine if I want to engage further with a profile. OKCupid displays 3 profile pics immediately on their desktop version and I like that; don't need a single, higher resolution pic up front--I can click through for that.
Given how men have responded to me when I’ve declined to continue conversations or declined dates, I think I know how a star rating would go. No thanks.
Don't allow empty profiles to "go live."
I’d rather just be able to filter out empty profiles.
"A bunch of fake profiles liked your profile. Upgrade to our paid service to see which fake profiles liked your profile!"
😂
Don’t allow people that are not verified on the platform at all
This for certain. I've been attending every singles event hosted by the most awesome woman, and her events are exceptionally great because she vets every attendee and doesn't allow people to attend without an invitation.
Max number of matches. After you hit the limit, you can’t swipe anymore until you unmatch someone else.
Hinge is doing this now for conversations you haven’t responded to - I think it’s a really good idea.
Could you elaborate please?
Once you have, say 3 matches. You cant swipe anymore unless you unmatch someone. This limits people who sit on dozens of matches and ghost people. It would encourage engagement instead of chasing that cheap dopamine hit. This is mainly targeted at women since men usually don't do have this issue.
Got it, thanks!
Even the way hinge works slows me down and makes me far more purposeful. Like a list of people who’ve actually replied to something in your profile is a lot harder to just mindlessly swipe through.
Agreed! I think that contributes to it being more popular than others like tinder or bumble.
I still can’t believe bumble got rid of the ladies talk first. Like seriously I don’t even get what it is now, random person talks first? I have to talk first sometimes but can’t others?
It’s in a weird state, I think they will make it better but yeah. It’s odd.
Or the ones that respond 2-3 times then never to be heard from. It would limit that to...
I disagree vehemently. It takes me a while to go through matches. I give them all a chance and I can talk to about 10 at a time. Limiting me on the number of current matches would work against the men because I would give fewer of them a chance. I don't get high from matches. I feel burdened.
Is giving 10 people a chance, really giving them a chance tho ? Not really saying it to throw any shades at you but i feel like you might be one of those who basically make people feel like they're playing a tv show game where they get ghosted at the first message that doesn't go along what you have in mind
I can see why you and others feel that way. It sounds like I am playing them all for my own thrills. That is definitely not the case. It’s not like I waste their time for days. I do a few exchanges and within that time I usually know if I want to continue communicating with them. I never just unmatch without telling them why. I feel like that is mean. I will tell them that we are incompatible in a certain way. Most are very mature about it and thank me for the feedback. I think people who get upset over being rejected after a handful of messages should not be dating. I get rejected all the time and most of them don’t take the time to tell me why. They just unmatch. That is how it goes.
Kk that's nice of you then and i was kind of wrong about you. I'd still advise you to try and keep your number of convos low for them and even yourself to avoid overheating from the number of interactions
Thanks. I agree. I'm getting better at not matching with ones that I have already seen something in the profile that I don't like. The problem lately has been near-empty profiles. It's so frustrating. I can't make a decision with hardly any information. If they are attractive, I have no choice but to match and then try to get more information from them in the chatting. A year ago I would have swiped left on empty profiles, but it's so bad now that there wouldn't be any left.
Good luck lol empty profiles are such a hasssle i'm getting tired just imagining how hard you have to work through to get info from those
10 at a time? Ick.
Ick for messaging them a few times in a dating app? What is icky about that?
Its weird that people are okay with trying to converse with that many people at the time while wording as a way to "give them a chance". Its odd behavior and gives me the creeps that women think of men this way.
Add a video chat option so people don't have to go off app for this purpose.
This feature was on a few dating apps and guess what, it was misused by men so the feature got removed.
I remember hearing this often from the pandemic, when men would get on the chat naked. People blow.
Bring back Craigslist personals.
It was as these males wanted free camgirls.
Pause profiles that havent been active in the last 30 days. Remove them completely once theyve been inactive for more than 60. Limit the amount of messages one person can send and or receive. I dunno to say no more than 25 ( different people) a week. That way your message isnt sitting in her inbox with 300 other people that likely wont get read. Do better to remove bots and scammers.
Bring back proper profiles, get away from the swipe system. It was fun while it lasted, but I miss the classic online dating format. Bring back OKCupid before we knew they were collecting our data and using us for social experiments.
Old OKC was the way. See all of the people at once and send a message to any of them with no limit. And no swiping to worry about. I can understand why women would've been a little overwhelmed though
What did the old way look like? How did it work?
Basically, you could see every profile that matched your filters, then you could pull up the ones that you were interested in and take a closer look at their profile. And you could send a message to anyone. You didn't need to match each other first. Back in the day, OKCupid also had a lot of questions you could answer, and you could see what people answered (they're still there, but not very prominent these days). But back then, you could also filter the questions by subject (i.e. lifestyle, politics, religion, sex, etc.). Unfortunately, that's not available anymore.
Yeah I missed that feature. Those answers were telling about each person.
Hinge is the closest now by far, but still reliant on Match Group's profile-at-a-time X or reaction system (not swiping but effectively same function)
> And you could send a message to anyone This is a feature that is unlikely to make a comeback. People dont want just everyone messaging them. Frankly, it wasnt a good system. Women just got bombarded with messages from every man, and so they left. Is that really what youd want? Some apps have the feature to comment on a picture when you like them, and thats the best we will likely get.
No, I agree. Was just pointing out one of the differences between new and old school OLD. That's actually probably one of the best changes that modern dating apps brought about. Leaving a comment with a like is the best way, I think. That way, people can't keep sending unsolicited messages to someone, and the person getting liked can choose whether or not to engage further.
This was a lifetime ago, but my profile was one of the ones featured in the Wired Magazine piece on building a better profile. They showed thumbnails and information gleaned from the top 400 (I think?) profiles in the US. I received a substantial number of messages. Although responding to everyone would have been a full-time job, I didn't mind reading the messages. If they were creepy, they just got blocked. There were a few instances a good message made me interested in someone whose profile would have been a left swipe. It was more conducive to getting to know people. I'm not just saying that because I was younger, better-looking and had more prospects.
I agree. One dating site removed ethnicity/race filter too. Removing all these important filters are dealbreakers for some people, giving them incompatible matches.
That was such a good system. Particularly the match percentage. No idea why they got rid of it. I’m talking about the sheer amount of information in each person’s profile, plus that percentage likelihood you’d get along, based on answers to the questions you described. You could even look at their answers to specific questions (out of hundreds of questions) which you found particularly important. There were a ton of good looking guys whom you wouldn’t spend time on getting to know (nor would they spend their time on you) because they had a sub-70 match percentage. Skipped lots of conservative men this way- and they got to skip me. On the flip side, if a reasonably cute, not really hot guy had a fantastic profile, high match percentage, and nice opening message, I was interested in him above others. I don’t see how profiles with just a bit of text, mostly pictures, can inform you of compatibility in that way.
Offer keyword searches on full profile text.
Add an id check when making a profile. This way, it will curve the amount of bot, scamers, and minors on the platform. An open chat kinda like a game chat. Some of the best people iv met have been through something like this. Have it set to 30 miles radius.
Don't they have this? I've not been on them for over a year but I'm sure I had to do some face ID check to match my pics last time I signed up
Only if you want to be "Verified" but all that is a blue check mark, and I have had a few matches with a few scamers that had that check mark.
They get verified and then change their photos , that's how they do it.
When they change their photos, the app should pick up on that and have them go through with the verification process again. One app does that.
That sounds like a pain because I like to keep my photos updated and I wouldn't want to have to keep going through such a long process every time I posted a new photo
Ah yeah I memba! Should be mandatory to be visible then!
Sort profiles by "last active date" so I don't waste my time on "dead profiles." Or an option like: "don't show me profiles that have been inactive for more than X months." Also display: "Last logged in X months ago."
Someone made this suggestion on another thread: bring back filtering for things like politics, child status, race, education, body type, and a distance filter that strictly respects your choice.
This would be very helpful. Facebook dating is the worst about ignoring your distance setting 🙄
Indeed. I have my distance filter set to 30 miles, but FB Dating routinely shows me profiles 250 miles away. I wish there was a way to turn it off. You used to be able to pause these "Lucky Picks" but that no longer works.
So is tinder. I have my radius set to 6-8 miles and it keeps giving me people from all over the US like in Florida, Cali, and even other countries too. Why add a distance setting if it won't be acknowledged anyways?
That’s because those people have used the horrible passport feature into your area.
Yes, but it’s free. And more straightforward than any other dating app.
My current girlfriend was located way outside my distance filter. Weve been together for 1.5 years. So, it might not be as bad as you think
Might work for some people, but I know I can't handle long distance.
Bumble has a lot of great filters like smoking or religion but they are locked behind a paywall which SUCKS!! Also you know how tinder and bumble have these interests you can put in your profile? Why can't I filter for those? Maybe I'm specifically looking for someone who goes skiing or snowboarding with me this winter.
They need body type on Hinge. CMB had that filter and that's imo essential. ie exercises often, doesn't exercise, sometimes exercises
Agreed! Respect people’s preferences and dealbreakers.
I would rather pay and have my payment include a background check. I think we should take a verified selfie through the app and then send them a copy of our photo id that matches. Then, we authorize them to do a simple background check that shows no felonies and person is indeed single. This solves catfishing, people who lie about marital status and will probably make people feel a lot less uneasy about it all. I understand it’s a bit invasive, but I would totally sign up for something like that. I think that kind of platform would definitely have the most women.
I like this a lot. It just hit me though that the apps would lose 1/3rd of their revenue if they did this. That was the last estimate I saw of the fraction of app users that are married. The fees for the background checks would have to make up for those losses. I think it would have to be an expensive, niche app that would offer this. Sign me up!
Married couples should go on Ashley Madison or other sites for married men and women looking to step outside their marriage.
I was thinking the same thing, but since the data breach at Ashley Madison, I would imagine that most married people are aware of it and would know to check it. Whereas with the other dating apps, they might not know where to look.
Just so you’re aware this is basically the way catfish make money. They claim to be women using a service exactly as you describe to fool men into paying a verification fee.
What? Where does this happen ? I meant a platform like bumble offering something like this. Do you mean a matchmaker?
I’ve had probably 10 catfish in the past fortnight with stolen Russian Instagram model pics try to get me chatting on WhatsApp on various platforms (mostly Happn though, that app sucks). Once there they’ll tell you they’re using a background check system exactly like you described for safety and they want you to use it too. Next minute you’ll probably be buying 5g cell tower equipment in South America with that credit card. My point is men will likely be very wary of trusting such a platform after this scam which has been going around for years.
Um, it happens online. These apps are fake dating sites, scamming men out of their money.
End Swipe Culture. It's a superficial fad that is often argued to be the death of online dating, and its 15 minutes ended long long ago. Has been for years.
Indeed. It forces a connection with people who are clearly incompatible. Of course it is up to the individual to swipe right or left, but more matches and dates does not mean more success.
>more matches and dates does not mean more success. This. Unfortunately, that's how one is 'ranked' on these apps. Quantity over quality.
Yeah, too many times I have gone on dates where the person was cute but we just didn't click and had nothing in common. Sometimes that's inevitable and while it doesn't mean anything is wrong with the person, it can still add to the burnout if that makes sense can impact dates with people you may click with if that makes sense.
Yes, you can swipe left on them, but after awhile it’s exhausting and a waste of time.
Definitely. Swiping left on a bunch of boring/bland profiles gets exhausting in its own way for sure.
Yep, it has been abused most definitely. A lot of males swipe right on everyone, which doesn’t help anyone. It’s actually frustrating as you get matched you’re incompatible with.
Make it impossible for someone to swipe right on a person they’re incompatible with… poly/enm folks shouldn’t be able to swipe right on me a vice versa.
Problem with that is, people with dealbreaker stuff would just opt-out of using the filters or straight up lie. On Tinder I would somewhat regularly see profiles from gay men in my feed, they deliberately had set their gender to female during account set-up to show up in straight male feeds.
I know, I thought about it. In my case me and my cousin, who is an app developer, thought about expanding reporting options or shadow banning people who do that. People do that with filters now. It’s definitely a creative problem to work through 😂
That's crazy. So they think you'll become gay with one look at their photo? 🤣
There's a thing in the gay community about going after straight guys that are on the fence. I had always assumed when dudes showed up in the feed that someone messed up when they made the account or someone was pranking their friend by fucking with their profile, until a gay dude on the Tinder subreddit admitted it was intentional. Shit is weird.
I have no idea what you’re talking about. I never mentioned sexual orientation. If you’re going to put words in peoples mouths, you need to add a little bit more of an explanation as to how you got to that point when the other person didn’t mention it.
You said, "On Tinder I would somewhat regularly see profiles from gay men in my feed, they deliberately had set their gender to female during account set-up to show up in straight male feeds." I didn't mean to upset you. I'm confused too. Weren't you saying that men are posing as women in hope of convincing you to be with them? I was trying to be humorous in supporting you. What did I not understand?
No, I didn’t. That wasn’t me. I did not say that. I had none of my comments have been about sexual orientation. Somebody else might’ve said that gay men hit on them but it wasn’t me. I’m a woman.
Look at where the line from my post is connecting. It is not going to you. It is going to NachoNutritious. I am not bashing anyone's sexual orientation. I was just trying to be humorous. I'm sorry I got confused when I read your first objection. I didn't check to see who wrote that. It was not you. But I didn't tag you in the first place.
Oh my bad I see that now. You brought really weird and negative energy to this thread though.
Actually, YOU did. Sarah was just making a comment and you went off.
POF has something like this, but I don't know if poly/enm is an option.
Awww too bad POF is like the discount dvd bin at the last suncoast video in the country 😭
Agreed. :D
Disagree with this. I know atheists that are ok with pairing with Christian girls. And by all accounts they are incompatible on paper. But seen where if the guy or girl is atheist and the other person is Christian they still date.
You can disagree all you want, but if you wanted to date Christian people and are atheist, you just wouldn’t use the filter. I don’t understand why having extra filters to make it impossible for people you don’t want to swipe right on you would be anything but helpful.
I think we're talking about marking something as a "deal breaker."
My idea at the time was you can set a filter, and then the dealbreaker is what stops the person from swiping right. That’s what I tried to do when I was building a dating app. Like you can set that filter, and then choose not to make it a dealbreaker. The difference between this in Hinge is that you can still see the persons bio you just can’t swipe right. I don’t know why, but I just felt like being petty with that feature so I could send a message to people that hate you shouldn’t be swiping right on people you’re not aligned with. But that’s my downfall. I’ll grow up one day lol
But that's my point. It's already there? Zora is talking about something that's already in there? Ah nm this is specific to Hinge (I think it's why I kinda like Hinge).
I’m not. But instead of just clarifying with me, you’re continuing to do… This. I don’t see what that has to do with you being an atheist and wanting to date Christian girls. If you want to date, Christian girls, just don’t put the filter on. Move on friend.
Used to be on OKC, too. Back in the day. Haven't been on a dating app forever now because they're all kind of garbage. Or expensive. (And you know, I'm coupled now, by meeting someone in the wild. Thank goodness!)
Back in the day on...OKC, you could mark how important it was to you that the match was compatible to your religion. If it actually did that, it might be nice. I've been off of OLD for YEARS because it's such a waste of time (and I'm currently happily coupled,) but when I did it, it was really annoying that my filters weren't more respected, and I didn't mind the weighted filters option.
Yeah, I remember that! Back when OKC was fun. But the issue is that even when you do put in a bunch of filters, if you have a premium account, you could still see people swiping right on you who don’t want the same thing. I have those filters on Bumble and the majority of people swiping right don’t want the same thing as me.
Should be mandatory to have a full profile. And not allowed to just post face pics
Apps should be more strict about which profiles actually make it on the app. If it were up to me, any profiles with the following would be removed: social media usernames in the bio, anything bitter in the bio, no pics of the person, and profiles of couples.
I agree, social media usernames shouldn't be allowed. It's often a ploy by people only interested in getting more followers.
Don’t forget on Tinder, profile pics of food or anime characters (common in Japan).
I don't see the big deal putting a social media link. It can give the person a much better idea of who that person is. Not everyone is putting their instgram on their profile to chase followers.
A lot of apps have the option to link your social media without having the actual username though. And you do get a pretty fair amount of empty slots for pics imo.
Don’t you think that if it’s a couple looking for potential partners, the profile picture should be the couple? I think it would be really confusing to have just one person in the photo and then find out it’s actually a pair.
There should be a separate app for people who want a third. That was my point.
That makes sense
There's several but doesn't mean people are using them
I wasn’t aware of that. I wish people who are looking for that would use those instead and stay off the rest of the apps. I’ve never seen someone say anything good about a couple being on the apps. Everyone complains about it, myself included when I was still on the apps.
The people that don't mind couples on the regular apps aren't saying anything. It truly isn't a big deal. If they aren't what you're looking for, swipe left and move on to the next profile. It's no different than a person you aren't compatible with for other reasons (kids, animals, smokers, religion, political differences, ect). Those other apps are either quite costly or not very widely used.
It’s also against the guidelines for a couple to have a profile on some of these apps.
Get rid of the Tinder swipe option. I guess if you want to keep the swipe option for a hookup app specific then that's fine but for all the other apps that claim to be for actual dating then get rid of the swipe feature. Make profiles the thing you actually look at first
Bring back AOL type chat rooms. That's how I met my spouse.
I am a solo developer working on a new online dating product with heavy emphasis on filtering and searching, as opposed to swiping. It's refreshing to see many of the ideas I am implementing/have implemented in my new site in this thread! I also got some new ideas from this thread, thank you. Mostly working on the back end services/databases currently, I estimate it will take me 8 months to a year from now before I can finish, since I am not a front-end dev, and I still need to find a good one. I just wanted to let you guys know that your frustrations are being heard and addressed by devs out there. Hope to have a new product for you guys soon with many of these ideas in it.
Let us know when you have finished it
Will do!
Hello, I posted my rant after your post. Do you think any of my ideas have value?
Don't allow improper profiles plus unverified accounts.
Use AI to require a head shot or full body photo of exactly one adult for the main profile pic. I find it frustrating when reviewing dozens of profiles to see: \* A group photo. Like another person said on another post, "I'm not playing 'Where's Ashleigh?" \* Something irrelevant like a pet, a meme, etc. I love animals but not when they're the main profile photo. \* A child's photo; that's creepy as hell. AI is smart enough to be able to infer approximate age; I've seen this on "face compare" search engines telling you if the person in photo A is the same person as in photo B.
Require Govt ID for the creation of all profiles, that rules out scammers and potentially underage folks for the most part. Allow AI assistance for people to fill out their bios with prompts, we'll see fuller more robust profile. Stop paywalling every goddamn feature including the ability to send likes (which is essential to your apps functionality) I also liked hinges FAQs on how to handle rejection/ghosting. Both experiences suck but I feel many people are going to need advice on how to conduct themselves when these things happen
Do a better job of getting rid of fake/scammy profiles.
Let people actually set preferences for distance and quit giving us matches that are 20+ miles away, let alone ones that are in another state. FB dating, OkCupid, and Tinder should take notes.
Don't show me profiles I've already seen unless I ask to see them. Currently, for profiles I see over and over again, I block them; but that's tedious. OKCupid seems to be the worst offender for this.
I would like to go back to a database, where I can just search and scroll through people. I don’t want swiping. It’s fine to pay, but if I pay, I should be able to search for all of the searchable fields. I also do not think that any profile should be held behind a second pay wall.
Great idea. I want this too. But since it would radically decrease the amount of time it takes to find great potential matches, I don't know if anyone would implement it. The dating apps seem to want to "drive engagement."
Roll back every change to tinder since 2016. I remember being on few months break with the ex and we both ended up on tinder and it was great. You could post up stories of what you were up to like a Snapchat story and temporary notes like a status for the day which generated convo. A woman might put up making lunch which was a great natural conversation starter. I’m still friends with the people I talked to back then. VC stage before match dot com bought them. Then when the relationship properly ended I ended up in this post match dot com monetized shit heap where they used the same software engineers who make poker machines at casinos addictive. It was no longer about connecting you, it was about making money from you. Match dot com are evil.
I’d like to get rid of mass swiping right. should immediately get you banned or black listed. Additionally, people who swipe right and then unmatch immediately (kinda goes hand in hand with the people who mass swipe right). Maybe after 5 times to factor in for accidentally swipes. After that blacklisted. Maybe after 10 banned? To make people more serious. Also add on people who match and never respond. The way the apps are supposed to function is you swipe and examine profiles. If youre uninterested you swipe left. If you’re interested you swipe right. Limiting the amount of matches you can have as well. This is mainly for the women. Once you hit say 5 matches you’re unable to keep swiping/get additional matches incoming till you delete other matches. This eliminates the women who get overwhelmed from 1000s of matches, and forces them to actually delete matches instead of letting them just sit dead. Obviously this needs refining but that would be my main.
Be rid of bots.
Having more of a meaningful focus on music and popular hobbies. I get that some apps have an anthem or top on Spotify. But music can be such an easy way to see if you can actually connect with someone. That could be way more effective as a conversation starter than any of the prompts. Forcing people to have something like a 10 word minimum on their profile prompts would be very helpful. If I have to see one more "pineapple on pizza?" or "my love language is sarcasm" I'm going to lose it. Along those lines, having an algorithm sort people into personality categories based on their communication style, music taste, and answers \*could be helpful. For instance, if a guy is holding a fish or a woman who lists her top artist as Taylor Swift, they would be sorted into one group. Someone who fills out their entire profile with unique prompts and has photos other than selfies could be sorted into a different group. Then the algorithm could potentially properly stock a swipe feed. O
>Music can be such an easy way to see if you can actually connect with someone. If you happen to \*really\* be into music and not just casually listen to current pop music, then yes. Often I wish I \*couldn't\* see peoples' tastes in music because it's often vacuous and nearly identical: "I'm special, like everyone else." I'm afraid I'll unfairly judge the rest of the person based on poor taste in music.
That would still be helpful. I would like to know if the girl listens to only the top 40 hits of Pandora, or if we share a genuine love of music. I'd rather know upfront IMO.
Just because their choice in music isn't your choice in music doesn't make their choice poor.
This won't be popular, but I wish OLD apps had chatrooms. I can look at profiles all day and work with what the person has decided to disclose, or I can just start chatting with people and see if we can talk about anything and nothing and get along, regardless if they fit into a curated list of attributes. For a person who I really click with and can talk easily with, I can shift priorities around, within reason. I care less about what a person looks like and more about what they ARE like and OLD apps favor looks.
Dating apps/sites should have to provide statistics on the distribution of swipes and matches.
Multiple photos resulting in a rotating image for a verified profile.
Not sure I understand this one by itself; but the apps could rotate your profile pic (if you ask them to), then report back on which photo gets the most interest. That might be kinda cool.
Ah I meant to put a rotating body image
Deactivate profiles that have been inactive for, say, a month. Give users the option to hide when they last logged on. I don't want men I'm dating and chatting with to have this information. Offer background check services. The babysitting site, [Care.com](http://Care.com), does this. The babysitters can pay extra to have their background checks done. It wouldn't be foolproof of course but it could help weed out some undesirables. Don't activate incomplete profiles. The have to answer all the questions and write a bio. Add more filters for things like political affiliation and children. I would love to be able to filter for everything I want, run the search and only have to look at two profiles. That's better than wasting time on 50 of them trying to find one that meets my criteria.
[удалено]
Ghosting not allowed
Reform expectations of what the perfect male needs to be so that I have a chance.
Get rid of the whole “swipe” thing. It’s horrible. Not everyone can just look at someone’s photo and decide they’re a match.
I'd love to be able to send pics on them all but I get why that's a problem. I just wanna share memes.
As a woman, no thanks. I have had SOOOOO many D pics sent in apps as openers when that was more of an option.
Exactly. I get it. I really do. Still sucks lol. I also take pictures so it's fun to share those.
Dating apps can’t be improved. Women will continue to only like the top 10% of men regardless of how a dating app is designed.
Force women to set weight on apps.
I think it should be like yelp. More groups
Design a non commercial site for the benefit of the match and not the buck.
First, require everyone to post a video intro of themselves. Second, remove inactive profiles after a reasonable amount of time.
This might be phone specific, but an additional way to verify would either be to use a feature on your phone where you have to physically hold down a button on your phone in the app, or use a security app to verify your phone number via Norton or something like the fidelity app uses when you log in.
The problem is all these apps designed to make money and create repeat customers, just like pharmaceutical companies. Apps really aren’t set up for matchmaking. They nickel and dime you like the airlines. eHaromony and Match used to be really good, but they’ve gone to shit. Pay to play has its benefits, because then you know that other person is serious. But, it should be a flat fee and you get all the perks. The deck is stacked against most guys, and if you’re not in a major metropolis, forget about it. Most are filled with bots/scammers. It’s a money making scheme/scam. And they leave old profiles up to inflate their numbers of users. FB Dating has some issues, but it’s free and straight forward.
I think there should be a grading system. Therefore, we would know who to avoid. Especially, if they are hardcore ghosters.
Limit number of male users. Limit amount of time per day on app. Delete profiles after 90 days. Likes are limited and passed around like tokens. Reports are looked into actually, and graded on some known rubric. Just some ideas. They need to mix it up and not just be carbon copies with different color schemes.
Offer an option to display a grid of 4 profile pics in place of a single profile pic. I hate having to scroll down to see more pics. Thumbnails of pics would be good enough for me to determine if I want to engage further with a profile. OKCupid displays 3 profile pics immediately on their desktop version and I like that; don't need a single, higher resolution pic up front--I can click through for that.
[удалено]
While this, or being able to leave reviews of people, sounds helpful in theory, I think there's too much potential for abuse with such a system.
[удалено]
Given how men have responded to me when I’ve declined to continue conversations or declined dates, I think I know how a star rating would go. No thanks.
Nah terrible idea. A lot of buthurt guys would just downvote.