Real stories about dating and relationships in New York City. Truth is more interesting than fiction.

A Quick Morning Thought (More On Online Dating)

So I now have most of the 30+ guys who are in my “active match” group on in a holding pattern.  I’d delete them but I can’t just delete them.  To get rid of them I’d need to give the system a reason why and quite frankly I just don’t feel like doing that.

I will, however, tell you why I’m not moving forward with them.

They fucked up the short answer questions.  You see, Chemistry.com works on these graduated stages of communication.  The third stage is short answer questions.  You pick 2 questions, the guy picks 2, you read each other’s answers and then decide whether or not you wish to move forward.

And almost all of them failed.  Some failed for the most pathetic and obvious reason of all – lack of effort/stupidity (OK – maybe those are 2 reasons).  If a guy’s answers are riddled with typos, misspelled words and poor grammar then this tells me he’s oblivious and doesn’t care enough to use spell check/grammar check.   I kind of feel a little sorry for these guys and a part of me wants to send them little notes suggesting that they shape up if they ever want to date a woman of any quality.

The majority failed because of their actual answers.  Now, I didn’t pick deep, meaningful questions and I wasn’t looking to hear anything specific from them (for example, some guys choose questions about music or movies to assess similarities in taste – I didn’t go that route).  I chose one relatively serious question and one silly question.  The guys who failed failed because they couldn’t roll with it.  They couldn’t give an honest, earnest, serious answer to the serious question (instead, giving me half-assed sarcasm) or taking the silly question way too seriously.

OK – I guess I’m being vague here.  I’ll give you one of my questions (there was a list of about 10 to choose from, I didn’t bother making up my own).  My silly question was:  “What are your guilty pleasures?”  I really didn’t care what a guy answered as long as he admitted to some vice.  Well at least half of them gave me paragraph (usually a poorly written paragraph) about how they try not be guilty or they like to stay disciplined, etc.  It’s a silly question and doesn’t warrant deep meditations on the nature of guilt.

Anyway, they get killed on the short answers. I still think this graduated communication thing is way too time consuming, but it does seem to provide a lot of opportunities to eliminate the non-starters.


Tags: ,

6 to “A Quick Morning Thought (More On Online Dating)”


  1. Hypatia says:

    I eliminate people for the EXACT SAME REASONS. I figure, why waste my time, you know? If we’re so “off” on this very limited profile basis, then chances are we’ll just find a lot more ways to be “off” when we actually meet.

  2. PiscesInPurple says:

    Argh! I feel your pain here. It’s so hard to find a guy who can express himself in writing. That’s probably why I date engineering geeks, so I can convince myself they’re not shallow, they’re just idiot savants. Or something like that. :)

  3. SINgleGIRL says:

    -Hypatia
    It makes sense, doesn’t it? But it just takes so damn much time!!
    -PiscesinPurple
    It’s funny you mention engineering geeks. I have always had a thing for science guys, over writers/arty guys. Not sure why.

  4. derek617 says:

    So, if chemistry.com is only sort-of working for you, have you considered trying a second site? Yeah, I realize it’s more money, but if you’re serious about it, might not be a bad option. Dating sites that don’t have a “twist” or “angle” like chemistry.com do might serve as a good secondary option as it they allow you to be more free-form in how you pursue the possible relationship. I tried a couple before settling on one of the more free-form services (I don’t want to pimp them out, so I won’t name it, but it’s very well known).

    Remember too, that online dating is probably much harder for guys than for women. A lot of us have difficulty expressing ourselves in this way in email, and it’s a bit of an ego blow that you take by signing up for an online dating service if you’re normally a prideful, confident guy. That stigma has been eroded considerably over the past 5 years or so, but it’s still present, make no mistake. Most guys probably don’t publicize their patronage of these services to their friends.

    In your case, maybe you just need to explore a different service with a different style (maybe you have, I haven’t read your blog back to genesis). There will certainly be some of the same guys on there too, but probably a whole crop of new ones. If you feel you’ve mined the current vein of chemistry.com guys and you’ve got nothing left, maybe it’s time to try another mine and come back to this one in a month or two. Mix it up, and it may cause you to re-assess how you go about the process too.

  5. SINgleGIRL says:

    -derek617,
    I appreciate your concern. You missed the context. I was test driving a few sites at a time (Chemistry being one of 3) so that I could write about them/let you all know how they worked for me. I have been online dating for years using a different site and thought it would be interesting to try something new. I will be moving on, in a few days to a few different sites.

  6. SINgleGIRL says:

    -derek617,
    oh forgot to mention – in re the ego blow thing. Guys have got to get over that. And in general, I am so not interested in any guy who can’t deal with it. It’s JUST online dating, for christssake. If a guy thinks thats a blow to his ego, he and I will not get along.