Test Adds New Twist to the Dating Game - Online Personals Watch: News on the Online Dating Industry and Business

« Niche Dating Sites Match Habits, Pets, Disabilities | Main | Graying Singles Adopt New Dating Mores »



And if the results are negative, certain inhibitions may disappear.

Ouch, that never occurred to me. I really hope that doesn't happen, that we end up with LESS protected sex because of it. It'd be a shame to end up with more unwanted pregnancies because people thought they could get away scott-free.

Mark Brooks

Overall this should be a step in the right direction. There are a multitude of birth control options. There's only really one choice for protecting against AIDS.

I hope Orasure has something in the way of an online marketing budget. The online personals industry is the perfect target for them.

Mark Brooks
Online Personals Watch
[email protected]

Alexander Shetinin

Ahaaa! That's always a relief to say "I told ya" and quote myself on the comment I made about TRUE on Nov.19, 2005:

There've been so many words said and written in regards with the legislation initiated by True.com. I usually prefer to stay away from this fruitful arguments, 'cause True is not going to pay me to promote their stuff unlike all these PhD's and lobbyists on True's payroll.
But this time I decided to break my silence. Here is why.
People who understand the nature of the discussion keep saying that any kind of automated background check is not going to work because its very limitations. Therefore, security it is supposed to bring is more of an illusion. If so, why should the government be involved? It's all true.
But now it seems I have an ultimate argument to support the idea that regulators should stay away from this.
As we all recognize safety and security are essentially important. No doubt about it. So if we assume that the security issue is resolved thank to “restless” True.com efforts, then the government should be involved in safety as well. I mean health issues associated with dating itself. Since dating and matchmaking are all about relationships and ultimately sex in the end, then a user should be provided with guarantees that the counterpart he/she is dating with is free of STI (sexually transmitted infections) and HIV-AIDS in particular.
Nobody will argue that health issue is as important as security. So the question is where is logic? If there is the background check legislation there must be STI check legislation too. And dating provider must be held liable.
And since True is such a great protector of users' security, it also should implement STI check for all of its users. Otherwise, once somebody gets infected he/she will certainly require compensation from the provider.
Someone may say, "Use condoms." And it'd be true. But condoms do not protect 100%. It's first. And second, a similar argument can be brought up in to the background check discussion. "Meet in a public place. And expose all your relationship. You'll be 100% safe."
I'd love to hear from True guys and their PhD marketers.


The comments to this entry are closed.


  • Dig Deeper - Research Categories

We're Social

  • Facebook  X   Youtube Linkedin