Clean Up Your Industry! - Online Personals Watch: News on the Online Dating Industry and Business

« Re: Looking for Someone | Main | Online Dating Is Eroding Humanity »

Comments

Fernando Ardenghi

Guess who is the person who had been denouncing eHarmony, eDarling, iHamoni (eHarmony Japan), MeeticAffinity, Chemistry, True, Parship, Be2, PerfectMatch, PlentyOfFish Chemistry Predictor and others like them as a HOAX in several Consumers' Associations worldwide.

Mark Brooks

Fernando, you think all the top dating sites suck because none have adopted your matching system. There are some quality players out there. There are some hucksters. The problem is, its tough for users to discern the difference.

Mike

My suggestion is that a site should be created as a romance scam clearing house similiar to stopforumspam.com with an API to check IP, email, and username against a list of know spammers at registration.

Fernando Ardenghi

"There are some quality players out there. "

And who are they? Please provide name and business contact emails.

List of companies I had analyzed and debunked.
WeAttract (2003)
PerfectMatch, Duet Total Compatibility System.
eHarmony / eDarling / ihamoni (Japan).
Chemistry.
Match Affinity, Meetic Affinity, Dating Direct Affinity (Ulteem).
OkCupid.
Be2.
Parship / eCift.
The PlentyOfFish Chemistry Predictor.
The PlentyOfFish Marriage Predictor.
eVow's compatibility matching method.
12Like.
LittleHint.
datingDNA.
Zoosk Scientific Matching Service/System.
True.
LovePlanet.ru
MyType.
ScientificMatch.
Basisnote.
GenePartner.
RewardingLove.
ButterfliesAgain.
IntelligentElite.
Brainiac Dating.
IQ Gorgeous.
DoskonalaPara.
Nomoredates.
ThomasKnowsPeople.
MatchMatrix.
Moonit.
VisualDNA.
IntroAnalytics People Recommendation Engine.
FriendScout24 BQ check.
Clicck.
HowAboutWe.
Zin.gl
WriteMatch.
ASoundMatch.
Soul2Match.
FindYourFaceMate.
"FaceReader from Profiler1: Personality Traits analysis based on facial features."
Are We Good Together?
Opposites Connect.
ZooZamen.

All of them are like placebo!

WorldWide, there are 5,000 -over five thousand- online dating sites
but no one
is using the 16PF5 to assess personality of its members!
but no one
calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one
can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one
is scientifically proven!

Mark Brooks

I rest my case.

Josh

I've been a member of the majority of the major sites. The biggest offenders as far I seen with Fake profiles, spam responses and what not are: True.com, Singlesnet, Cupid.com, Zoosk and Mate1. Most of the other sites in my dealings are pretty legitimate with their user base and whether users are real, especially the free sites like PoF and Okcupid. It seems like more of the pay sites fall victim to having fake accounts and users.

Ian Andrew Bell

At best, methods to retrofit existing communities with scam detection technologies will be recursive in nature. It is the fundamental design of these services that makes them so open to manipulation by Nigerian scammers, camgirls, etc.

Heck -- even legitimate users create fake accounts to check out the competition; and now that sites will share who's looked at your profile with users, sophisticated users create dummy accounts for browsing and screening and login to their regular account for messaging.

This behaviour is tolerated, perhaps even encouraged, because it inflates user numbers -- and this is the main metric by which large sites compare themselves and by which the upstarts are measured when they go for new financings. In other words, we've created a positive feedback loop for these behaviours. Why is anyone surprised that it's a problem?

twitter.com/rosswilliams

I was going to stay out of this but, well, we all know I'm an opinionated git.

Frankly - consumers will dictate behaviour and it is my belief that the situation will right itself as brands that use such techniques will run out of steam - it's the easiest thing in the world to trick people into paying, it's something else to keep them there and provide a service that they return to (something I'm very proud that we do well).

From another perspective, the industry has some deep questions to ask itself when companies who (allegedly) use such techniques are top sponsors at the largest industry event. Accepting sponsorship and business from such companies condones that (alleged) behaviour and will simply perpetuate that activity.

But I do believe that these things come out in the wash - companies who resort to such tactics (which can be see easily using the horses head test which caught out woome.com) are businesses built on sand and it is only a matter of time until their business collapses. The bigger they are, the harder they fall.

And Fernando - please stop hijacking legitimate debate with your single item agenda. It's why a lot of people stop bothering to comment and debate issues on this site.

Best wishes,

Ross

Brenda Hull

I am starting a dating site myself because of all the scamming going on. I was appauld after looking into this how sites can buy fake profiles (300 for 100 bucks). Really has it come to luring people in with fake profiles? People,,, when you see a profile and it looks like your dream model, more than likely its just that a dream. Seeing this over and over and my friends getting scammed I decided to start myself a site, a local site where I organize fun things where a bunch of singles can meet. I guess paying $100 to $500 dollars would of made it easier for me. Hopefully my hard work and honesty wont get lost in the scamming shuffle. Haven't found your Match? Still seeking Harmony? Look me up.

Mark Brooks

Starting a dating site is tougher than it looks. Best to START with marketing channels. Not site/software. Consider where you can find traffic/people. Then build a site around that niche.

Please don't succumb to the temptation to buy in profiles. Its very tempting, because you won't convert until you're at critical mass. You have to stock your shelves with users before you'll see conversions.

What's critical mass? Very, very roughly ~5000 active logging in a week.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Research

  • Dig Deeper - Research Categories

We're Social

  • Facebook  X   Youtube Linkedin