Hacker News Reader

Comment by version_five | Hacker News Reader

My takeaway is that many people would rather decide themselves than set a blanket policy, even if results are similar. I feel this way about most consumer searching- say a real estate search: you may have a good idea of the location and specs of the house you're looking for, but much better to set wider filters just in case something interesting comes along that's out of spec in some way. Even if effectively you only consider the ones that would have made it through a tighter filter. I'm not at all surprised this is true for online dating as well.

View on HN

Interestingly enough, the reason why I do it is because in both real estate markets and dating apps, its extremely common to have questions not answered (or not answered correctly).

For example, in real estate try sorting by decreasing lot size, everything at the top of the search will be microscopic lots where they multiplied the acreage by 1000x or more.

On the dating apps I tried at one point, adding filters for a question filters out everyone that did not answer the question, which is not the desired result for many things, so I just removed the filter altogether and filter manually. So in that case its more of a function of shitty design of real estate and dating apps that caused it for me.

That's our excuse, but in practice when you find yourself swiping left simply because they're not the right age only 5 minutes after you set the age filter, you start wondering if maybe there's a difference between your stated and revealed preferences. I know I do.

> but in practice when you find yourself swiping left simply because they're not the right age only 5 minutes after you set the age filter, you start wondering if maybe there's a difference between your stated and revealed preferences.

Meh…

I almost always set a really wide band on age on dating apps. The catch is that the folks at the extremes have to be exceptional in one or more ways in order to get a positive reaction from me.

Typically it’s:

- Really young people (I’m in the middle aged dating pool) have to show some maturity — I don’t want to date a kid, and I don’t want to date someone with a daddy complex.

- Older ladies need to show some youthfulness. Some people have clearly given up in middle age in terms of taking care of themselves and doing interesting things. I’m not interested in these folks — they seem like they have one foot in the grave to me.

For reference, my dating range has been -15 to +7, so I don’t think I’m being overly narrow in my band. That said, most of my dates are in the -5 to -10 range.

>> The catch is that the folks at the extremes have to be exceptional in one or more ways in order to get a positive reaction from me.

I think this is the crux of the issue - we don't have absolute, binary requirements, we have weighted preferences. "He's a bit older, but then again he looks youthful. OTOH he doesn't have any hobbies. But then again we're aligned politically. Okay, I'll chance it."

A better way would be to allow you to set these weights and have a scoring system, and then you can set a numerical threshold.

>A better way would be to allow you to set these weights and have a scoring system, and then you can set a numerical threshold.

That would be great, but it won't work. Too many people will answer questions incorrectly or not at all, and almost no one will be able to even use the app effectively even if the app designers implemented it. And I have no confidence the app developers would even be able to implement it properly.

Yep that’s where I’m at too, more or less - I’ve given up on imposing strict boundaries on potential matches, I just meet people and see if I like them. One of my buddies is real outraged about it, she thinks I’m wasting people’s time, but I don’t see it that way - I’m consistently surprised at who I end up vibing with, and i don’t know how to set rules for myself that would still allow me to meet those people, while excluding everyone else with no potential. I’d rather just try stuff on and see what fits.

At this point the best I can do for ‘my type’ is weirdos who like me.

> I’m consistently surprised at who I end up vibing with, and i don’t know how to set rules for myself that would still allow me to meet those people, while excluding everyone else with no potential. I’d rather just try stuff on and see what fits.

Great observation.

I’m basically a “look at profile, send a dm if interesting, schedule a meeting if they reply” type of guy.

The first few minutes of a “coffee date” tells me more about the person than any amount of detailed profile or DMing can.

I mostly like this approach too, but the main problem I've found is that I've frequently found that I wished I could end the date within 5 minutes, and feel like I've wasted my time. But I couldn't tell this before actually meeting them in person, and I haven't found a way of gracefully aborting the date early.

Profound statement. Online dating reveals a whole lot to a careful self-observer- most of it quite uncomfortable or counter to self-image. I'd bet there are many analogs in advertising and other surveillance/tracking heavy industries. "They say they want this, but they consistently click on that"...

What would the online dating scene look like if apps let people filter by:

* race / ethnicity / religion

* weight / body type / body measurements

* height

* income / salary / net worth / debt

OKCupid back in the day gave you most of those knobs, but they got removed eventually.

The problem with spreadsheet-style filtering of humans is that in the real world that's not how you fall in love with someone. Someone can be too short, too chubby, of the "wrong" religion or political affiliation, but you still fall in love with them because of their energy, their warmth, their selflessness, their consistency, their presence and so on.

In theory more knobs = more better, but in practice I suspect it backfires by going against the grain of an authentic human mating experience. I can't imagine anything good coming out of the self-commodification and self-objectification that apps push us towards, even as someone who has more than extensive experience playing that game.

I was under the impression that the reason that the UI of OKCupid has been radically dumbed down is because it was bought by the Match group who wanted the app to look and act more like the rest of their apps.

This is backwards to human history. marriage within the tribe, caste, religion, etc. was preferred. The “knobs” were set by the families and matchmakers. The “love” marriage is more of an anomaly. Rather I’d say many people can make a relationship work and love is effort, not just “click”.

I actually agree with you if we look at this throughout the entire human history. Mating and romance being a necessary pairing seems like a recent phenomenon, the last 200 years or so?

It is possible for humans to survive and even overcome the hardship of effortfully maintaining loveless marriages, just as we can muddle through prison sentences or battles with cancer. People who needed partners in order to meet basic material needs just had to suck it up. In 2023, there is no reason to marry someone without profound and mutual love, and high confidence in the security and durability of that love. The horrifying, life-ruining, soul-eating catastrophe of loveless marriage is what makes it so beautiful and profound when people do chose to get married. That they feel confident enough to take that risk. It is a heartwarming display of optimism and faith.

Yes, however, I suspect that (in the 21st century bourgeois West) we underestimate the ability for two people to learn to love each other profoundly in the context of an arranged marriage where choice is removed from them.

I'd love to see statistics showing how longitudinal life satisfaction compares between societies where marriages are arranged and where there is total freedom of marriage partner choice.

every culture through history has told love stories, so it simply couldn't have been that unusual. in a tribe or small town, for example, you've been together since you were kids, so even if your marriage was arranged, the arrangers knew the landscape. It's a lot easier to make an arrangement with the arrangees are not pissing and moaning.

>Someone can be too short, too chubby, of the "wrong" religion or political affiliation, but you still fall in love with them because of their energy, their warmth, their selflessness, their consistency, their presence and so on.

Right, and then you get married to them, and then after years of constant fighting, you get divorced because you just weren't compatible in the first place, and those fundamental problems never went away despite all the feel-good emotions you had.

They already let you do that, but via using different dating services. JDate, WooPlus, EliteSingles, etc.

> height

I know that some of these apps allow for minimum height requirements. People don't like it went you suggest apps add width requirements in response.

Even if it's not explicitly a metric on the app, many people will say they have a min. height req. in their profile.

> income / salary / net worth / debt

I also seem to remember okcupid having some kind of education requirement, or heavily emphasized education.

I find it sociologically fascinating that it’s perfectly acceptable for women to say “don’t you dare swipe right if you’re under 6’” on these sites, but you will get banned immediately if you ask for a minimum cup size or a maximum weight limit, because that’s body shaming.

I suppose it’s a reflection of which side of the marketplace is much harder to retain.

I wish I could hide their age. Instead I can pay to hide my own. Sigh.

Dating apps have minimum allowed age ranges. So a lot of people probably do this but only because they can’t set a smaller range.

You may think 4 years is plenty wide for most people, but as a 26 year old male I really only am interested in eg 24-26 or even 25-26. There is also an “Elo”/mmr aspect where even if you are ok with dating someone 27-28, the reality of dating is that those women users will reject you at much higher rates than in 25-26, so including them in your range will lower the frequency with which you’re presented even to women that you do want to date due to lowering your “MMR”.

Agreed with other commenters that there are weighted preferences. While I may be ok seeing 22 or 23 year olds and in principle open to dating people in that range, in practice the rate of people I want to date in that range is much lower (but not 0). Same with people older than me.

I’d say including people beyond your actually revealed preferences actually indicates that you are open minded, assuming there are at least some people in that cohort that you are actually interested in, because it shows that you are willing to go through a much higher reject rate to find people who you are interested in.

> Dating apps have minimum allowed age ranges.

It's been a long time since I've used dating apps, but when I used them, you could set any arbitrary upper and lower age boundaries. Has this changed?

This is essentially why I don't order grocery store delivery via the internet. I tried it a couple times, and when the item I wanted was out of stock, they reasonably wouldn't pick a substitute. I think there were some options to specify a substitute, but it's just too much work to make a list and then make an alternative list for every item that isn't there. So I end up going myself and making those decisions ad hoc, which the store picker can't/won't.

Where is the grocery store for dates?

Pub, club, bar, fest, etc.

This is the grass people keep telling us to go touch?

My grocery store stocks dates, in season.

Costco does as well, it's cheaper in bulk.

It's cheaper, but not necessarily good quality.

The dates I've bought from Costco are usually people who are looking on their phones the whole time we're out. Why bother?

Oh god.. here goes another insane 2x or twitter thread about getting hit on while at the grocery store.

Find one with a middle eastern or “Mediterranean” focus. You’ll not only find plenty of fresh dates but a wide selection of nuts too.

Yeah, you don't want to miss that Short King with the Lambo.

The real reason to filter out short men is they tend to have exactly this sort of complex about it. It's the king part not the lambo you don't want to miss.

That's what I would expect a giraffe lady to say :)

ha true good point

I can't believe how well you were set up for this one, haha.

FWIW, as someone 5'8", I also filter out women who are taller than me. So I don't hold any grudges against women who filter out men who are shorter than them. And I think "giraffe ladies" actually have it equally as bad as short kings. Most men don't want to date someone taller than them. I think what some men find annoying is when short women filter out men under some arbitrary height. But personally I don't really care, that's their right to do (newsflash: people have preferences), and the better looking they are, the more of a reason they have to do it anyway.

Also, not all dating apps require you to list your height, so you can omit it from your bio at the risk of a disappointed look upon first meet, but that's up to you to make up for with confidence.

>>> FWIW, as someone 5'8", I also filter out women who are taller than me.

As a man, would you filter out taller women if you are casually dating? I think the preferences also depends on what you are looking for.

Yes, but just because that's my preference and I'm not *that* short. Most girls are shorter than me. If I were 5'3" or something, then it would obviously be more difficult to have such a preference. I do feel a lot of empathy for those guys.

Many taller women have a dismissive attitude toward anyone shorter than them. I once had a 6'1" woman become infatuated with me. She let it be known that someone taller than me was "too short". It isn't worth the bother fighting against instinct.

Of course woe to the man who expresses equivalent arbitrary requirements on fixed physical attributes in their selection criteria.

I’d caution against universalizing these preferences. I’m dating someone an inch taller than me and height so far isn’t a problem. I’d be sad if I didn’t meet her because of worrying about what she’d think about my height

lol. I love this attitude. The lack of self awareness that rejecting people that have had negative experiences causes negative experiences. Have you talked with people who are short, dated them, and/or attempted to talk to them when they go on a negative spiral?

yes? why do you assume I'm talking out of my ass here lol.

It's your responsibility to not let your negative experiences poison your soul. I have never personally filtered out short men but I've also seen enough of them with this nasty incel-lite attitude about why no one wants to date them that I understand why someone would.

>have never personally filtered out short men

You stated a hard preference on why you don't like short men here:

> The real reason to filter out short men is they tend to have exactly this sort of complex about it.

It's 100% fine to have your preference, and even more reasonable to not want to be around people who have aggressive attitudes. But don't be surprised when that group looks terrible when your viewpoint is nothing but that negativity you associated with them.

Nah I was saying that a valid & relevant reason exists, not that I act on that reason in my own life.

It's still bigotry though.

I'm pretty sure that most women are just not attracted to men even moderately shorter than themselves but they're too prideful to admit it so we get stuff like what you're saying and 'I want to date a guy I can wear heels around.'

Most people would rather just hear 'I'm not attracted to you because of an immutable physical characteristic' than some wishy-washy and nebulous dig on their personality.

Someone will complain regardless. The “problem” is women having preferences, not the way they express them.

Someone will always complain. Honest is still the best policy.

Having preferences is still a problem (a real problem) when your preferences are utterly unrealistic and ridiculous. Such as not-so-attractive 5'2" women demanding to only date men who are 6'4", or 60-year-old men refusing to date women older than 30.

Of course, I guess you could argue that people like this really shouldn't be in relationships to begin with, so it's better if they maintain their preferences and standards and refuse to budge, effectively self-opting out of the dating pool.

Why are unrealistic preferences a problem for anyone but the person with the unrealistic preferences?

The only way someone else’s standards become a problem for you is when you feel entitled to that person’s attraction (“I’m a 7 and she’s a 6, therefore she should give me a chance. But she only talks to 9s, the nerve!”). But you’re not actually entitled to anyone’s attraction, so that’s on you, not on them.

>Why are unrealistic preferences a problem for anyone but the person with the unrealistic preferences?

Did you read my 2nd paragraph?

>The only way someone else’s standards become a problem for you

For me personally, that's right. For society as a whole, suppose that everyone suddenly decided they would only date model-beautiful people. Pretty soon, everyone is terminally single, no one forms families or has children, and society dies out within a couple of generations (unless a different way of raising children is found, such as keeping them all in government-run institutions, but this still entails a radical change to society).

> I'm pretty sure that most women are just not attracted to men even moderately shorter than themselves

I don't deny some people aren't attracted to people their size or shorter AND short men tend to have insecurities that manifest themselves sometimes negatively AND it's become a fad/meme for women to go for tall guys.

The kind of hate that's been going around recently about short men isn't all that different from the bald man hate in the 80s and 90s IMO.

I generally agree with everything you're saying here, but I don't think that there's any sort of exceptional hate directed towards short men at this point in time, nor do I think that it's women being attracted to tall men is a fad/meme.

Yeah, I phrased that poorly. I didn't mean to imply that it was any more or less but rather that it is in the limelight. Hate is also the wrong word, it's more of a making light of the reality.

it's become a fad/meme for women to go for tall guys.

There's a reason that men are, on average, significantly taller than women (5'9" va 5'4" according to google). The preference dates back forever.

There's also a factor that people don't like to talk about: overweight women like tall men because it makes them feel "petite".

I disputed that, and it's now popular to post on social media both being rejected for being short or rejecting someone for being short.

Controversial but maybe under-appreciated point.

Similar here, I tend to filter by age on these apps not because that's what I'm strictly into but because in my limited experience older ladies tend to be more thirsty/desperate and that makes it difficult for me... I know I can meet a person above set age limit who will tick required boxes but chance of memorably awkward date seems too high.

I think that depends on your definition of "thirsty." The older ladies tend to be more interested in long-term dating, while the younger ladies are often (rather enthusiastically) open to short-term dating with older guys.

Yes enthusiastically short term younger dates can be awkward also, end result I don't use these apps recently, meet in real life or not at all...

In my experience, ladies that are too young seem to just be there for a free meal, and hoping to find a rich sugar daddy to buy luxury goods for her.

Older ladies are frequently downright desperate, but yes, generally only interested in something long-term.

I am certainly not at risk of being used as luxury good buyer. But a meet over a free (for her) meal can be fine and not at all awkward IMO, this way it doesn't feel like I am wasting someone's time if it turns out I am not interested (and if she's not interested well I got a conversation out of it).

I do this for pretty much everything. I prefer not filters at all, but if there's too much data to manually scan through, I'll use the bare minimum necessary to get the dataset down to a size I can manually deal with it.

The reason I started doing this is because there are too many tagging errors, and setting filters wide reduces the accidental omission of relevant items.

Also, as you mentioned, setting the loosest possible filter allows for serendipitous discoveries.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com