Looking for some messaging advice for OLD

[The Wisp]

Okay, so I wanted to go into more depth than in the general thread and I didn't want to derail Nearly's thread, so here we are.

Right now I'm trying to figure out who to message and what I should put in those messages. 

I'm looking for casual but warm relationships, be they just short flings or a few months. I'm wondering how open-minded I should be when messaging. On the one hand, I've only answered questions on topics that are important to me, which means that if somebody disagrees with me on anything it matters to me (and they do, highest match in my area is 91%). On the other hand, I'm not sure how meaningful individual questions are. For instance, I think people may have interpreted them somewhat differently than I have. Other times, the answers conflict with their profile (I don't know what to make of that). As I'm looking around, I'm getting hung up on individual question answers that contrast with mine. It's making me hesitate, but I kinda feel like I'm being just anxiously picky. I feel like maybe I should cast a wider net and figure out compatibility on a first date, but where's the line? The main thing I think is an automatic deal breaker is somebody who doesn't value sex very highly (which I saw in an otherwise good match ).

A couple other common things I'm seeing that I'm not sure if I should be open-minded about or not. Women who had submission/bondage fantasies, and those who are really into social justice. For the former, I think maybe I should be open-minded because I don't think they'd expect anything on the first date or anything. But I'm not particularly kinky. For the latter, I'm respectful of SJ activism, I'm fine with hearing about it and learning from it, but I don't always agree with all the parts of the narratives and I generally don't enjoy long passionate conversations about political/social issues even though I do find the issues interesting (i prefer low-key, nuanced discussions). I feel like if somebody puts "social justice" right in their profile, they're really passionate about it, so maybe I should stay clear? I'm not sure.

As far as messaging goes, a lot of these profiles don't give me much to go on. I'm tempted to have a line in my message semi-jokingly referring to that. For instance, on lady's profile says to message her "if you think we could have an interesting conversation, I guess".  I'm tempted to start off my message with "I guess I could have an interesting conversation with you". However, if she doesn't get what I'm referencing, that won't come off well, and if she does but feels I'm jabbing her mean-spiritedly, that won't work. What do you all think?

ETA: Also, I'm getting some good matches with 18 year-olds (all out of high-school, though some not yet in college; I would not date a high schooler), I'm not sure how I feel about that. I'm inexperienced, so I should be a good match, but it still feels a little odd (but they are good matches for me at the same time  ). Thoughts?

[eselle28]

Women who had submission/bondage fantasies, and those who are really into social justice. For the former, I think maybe I should be open-minded because I don't think they'd expect anything on the first date or anything. But I'm not particularly kinky.

This would be my suggestion: steer clear of women who mention it in their essays, but write women who indicate some interest in kink in their questions. Women who mention it in their essays are generally looking for partners who are at least open to their kinks, and are willing to put up with some really terrible messages to find compatible partners. Women who mention it in their questions? That could mean anything from an experienced person with very specific fetishes to someone who likes that sort of sex but who also enjoys vanilla sex to someone who has only had vanilla sex but has a few fantasies they're not sure they want to act on. I suspect a lot of women who'd otherwise be compatible with what you want in a partner will be at least a little bit sexually adventurous, so I think you might want to write to those women on the theory that they don't necessarily have to enjoy all their kinks with you specifically.

For the latter, I'm respectful of SJ activism, I'm fine with hearing about it and learning from it, but I don't always agree with all the parts of the narratives and I generally don't enjoy long passionate conversations about political/social issues even though I do find the issues interesting (i prefer low-key, nuanced discussions). I feel like if somebody puts "social justice" right in their profile, they're really passionate about it, so maybe I should stay clear? I'm not sure.

Why not take a third route with those profiles and put them on the backburner for a bit while you write to more obvious matches? I think there are some potential compatibility issues on both sides - on yours, that not everyone discusses things in low-key, nuanced ways, and on theirs, that they may be looking for someone who's more in agreement with their beliefs. I'd say that's a more challenging than usual situation, and might be better considered after you have some experience writing to other types of women and perhaps going on dates with them.

As far as messaging goes, a lot of these profiles don't give me much to go on. I'm tempted to have a line in my message semi-jokingly referring to that. For instance, on lady's profile says to message her "if you think we could have an interesting conversation, I guess".  I'm tempted to start off my message with "I guess I could have an interesting conversation with you". However, if she doesn't get what I'm referencing, that won't come off well, and if she does but feels I'm jabbing her mean-spiritedly, that won't work. What do you all think?

There's absolutely no way she won't understand what you're referencing. The reason for that is that she will have received many, many messages of that type. My profile has lots of content in it, but I basically chose to skip that section (for reasons that I don't think are very relevant to your question, unless you think they are and are interested) by saying something similar. A reasonable number of messages are in the form of a reply to that statement. It's a fine enough way to start a message, but I'd try to make sure to include at least one question as well. If all the message contains is a statement that you think you meet her expectations, that's kind of hard for her to reply to.

ETA: Also, I'm getting some good matches with 18 year-olds (all out of high-school, though some not yet in college; I would not date a high schooler), I'm not sure how I feel about that. I'm inexperienced, so I should be a good match, but it still feels a little odd (but they are good matches for me at the same time  ). Thoughts?

You're, what, 21? I think your line between high school students and 18-year-olds who are college freshmen or recent high school graduates seems like a wise one. I don't see any reason why there would be a problem with a college junior dating a college freshman or someone who could be a freshman. If you end up meeting enough 18-year-olds to form an opinion as to whether the average one is too immature for you, then I'd say proceed accordingly, but at this point I think it might be good for you to try to meet a variety of people so you can get some real world feedback on what works for you.

[The Wisp]

Thanks eselle, the advice is really helpful.

I like your distinction between women who mention kink in their profiles vs. only in questions. As far as SJ, I also agree I should probably start with the "low hanging fruit" of high quality matches.

As far as messaging, I've read the DNL articles, I know that I need more than that. I was just wondering as an opener if that's okay, and it seems like it is.

[The Wisp]

Wow... I just sent out messages to six women on OKC 

Here's a few of them, are they good?

Hi Maria! My name is Brian. Your profile has me intrigued! I am also looking to make sincere connections as well. 

I'm curious, what books/movies/shows are you interested in? 

I'm a fan of weird metaphysical science fiction books and movies. I recently saw Interstellar in theaters and loved it (it pushed all the right buttons for me)! Have you seen it?

This lady didn't take her profile very seriously, so that's where my tone comes from:

Hi, nametakenbear. I'm sorry to hear that your name was taken, you have my condolences. 

I wonder what it says about my sanity to be messaging someone who wants to crush men with her thighs? 

So, anyway, you're a writer, huh. What's do you like to write about?

Hi! I, too, like to pretend I know what I'm doing. I will stand with you in solidarity on that!

So, you're interested in politics and journalism. What is motivating you to study them?

[Guest]

Well, for what's it's worth, if I received any of those messages, I would flip over and check out your profile, and as long as it wasn't tremendously offensive, I'd respond.

I like the first one best, because it has a fun and light conversational tone and sounds really genuinely interested. It would stand out for me in a good way.

[nearly_takuan]

First one looks like a much terser version of the kind of stuff I've sent. The reply, if you get one, will probably look something like:

Hi, Brian. I like Parks & Rec. No I haven't seen Interstellar yet.

The second one may or may not get a good response, though if you got any personality out of her profile at all (and it sounds like you did), I rate your chances fairly good.

Third one's probably the best. And honestly probably a model for what I should try to do, instead of spending actual hours crafting elaborate paragraphs of inquiry.

[The Wisp]

Sigh, no responses yet. In fact only one of the five ladies (I said six yesterday, but I miscounted) has even looked at my profile (though maybe some have invisible browsing on?).

I know it's only been a day, I know some might be slower to respond, I know OLD is a numbers game, etc. but I've still been feeling a little down today.

[The Wisp]

And now I got matched with a bot on Tinder...

[nonA]

The problem is that, despite what people tell you, the average message these women receive isn't a poorly spelled come-on or an inappropriately personal photo.  The average message is very much like yours.  Most of the girls you message will get a lot of polite, inoffensive messages very much like your own, to the point that trying to keep up with all of them becomes too much hassle.  She'll think you're okay and totally mean to get back to you, but it'll get put off and she'll forget by the next time she logs on.

Skip the compliment.  She knows you were intrigued by the simple fact of your message, complimenting comes off like a cheap attempt to ingratiate yourself.  If you're smart, go right to something conversational.  You want something that's easy to reply to (so you don't get put on the back burner, which is the kiss of death), and something likely to get some immediate reaction instead of requiring thought.

[Guest]

The problem is that, despite what people tell you, the average message these women receive isn't a poorly spelled come-on or an inappropriately personal photo.  The average message is very much like yours.  Most of the girls you message will get a lot of polite, inoffensive messages very much like your own, to the point that trying to keep up with all of them becomes too much hassle.  She'll think you're okay and totally mean to get back to you, but it'll get put off and she'll forget by the next time she logs on.

Skip the compliment.  She knows you were intrigued by the simple fact of your message, complimenting comes off like a cheap attempt to ingratiate yourself.  If you're smart, go right to something conversational.  You want something that's easy to reply to (so you don't get put on the back burner, which is the kiss of death), and something likely to get some immediate reaction instead of requiring thought.

Are you a girl on OKC? Then maybe stop telling all of us here, who talk about our experience, what we actually receive? Here is literally every single message I received in the last month, and I don't think I'm atypical:

"Hi there ElizaJane, Hows it going?"

"How are you doing this Wednesday morning my dear and did you have a lovely night my dear. You look awesome! Maybe you can spare sometime for a dinner date when you are available. "

"Hi"

"Hello sweety...how are u?"

"You are cute."

"Hello pretty i saw your profile and you look very good and beautiful please i will be glade to know you more please. best regards henry"

"Hey nice to meet you my name is Shayne how are you doing today."

There is literally not a single one that references anything at all from my profile. :-/

[nearly_takuan]

If seven pasted-in messages with abysmal grammar remarking on (at most) your appearance is a typical woman's monthly inbox, I have to wonder why fifteen (so far) hand-written two-paragraph notes indicating things I noticed are sitting unanswered in my outbox for this month.

"Back burner death smooch" seems like a reasonable explanation to me. Of course, there's no way to know.

[KMR]

I wonder if there's a tendency to overestimate (or over-attribute) how much of the non-response rate is due to women getting too many messages versus how much is just women deciding that the guy is just not compatible with them in some way.

I had a huge drop-off in messages received between when I started using OLD at age 23/24 (receiving 5-10 messages a day) and when I came back to it at age 26/27 (receiving 1-2 messages a week), but the number of messages I responsed to was still roughly the same. This was because I had a good idea of what I was looking for and most people who messaged me were not my type or had things in their profiles that were dealbreakers for me.

[azazel]

Not to forget, you and the woman that Wisp messages are from clearly distinct age categories so your inbox isn't extrapolatable to theirs.
Back burner death smooch seems like a reasonable explanation to me too.

[nearly_takuan]

I wonder if there's a tendency to overestimate (or over-attribute) how much of the non-response rate is due to women getting too many messages versus how much is just women deciding that the guy is just not compatible with them in some way.

I had a huge drop-off in messages received between when I started using OLD at age 23/24 (receiving 5-10 messages a day) and when I came back to it at age 26/27 (receiving 1-2 messages a week), but the number of messages I responsed to was still roughly the same. This was because I had a good idea of what I was looking for and most people who messaged me were not my type or had things in their profiles that were dealbreakers for me.

Isn't it usually necessary to look at information about a person in order to decide whether they're compatible?

Pending OKC releasing more information about what conditions cause it to notify people of various things, it seems safe enough to assume there's more to getting someone to click through than just composing something thoughtful and correctly-spelled.

[KMR]

Isn't it usually necessary to look at information about a person in order to decide whether they're compatible?

Pending OKC releasing more information about what conditions cause it to notify people of various things, it seems safe enough to assume there's more to getting someone to click through than just composing something thoughtful and correctly-spelled.

Sorry, but I'm having a little trouble understanding what you're getting at here (possibly because I'm a little sleep-deprived). Could you clarify/elaborate a bit?

[eselle28]

I can buy that this is the back burner of doom. I suspect the women in question probably are viewing profiles but are doing so in invisible mode (I know that I tend to do this as it lets me look at someone's profile and then have some time to think about whether I'll reply and what I want to say).

It's probably not helpful to get caught up in discussions about what the average woman on OkCupid gets in her inbox as compared to the average woman on these forums and the average woman who you guys are choosing to write to. Realistically speaking, many women in their late teens to middle twenties will receive a number of messages from a wide variety of men, particularly ones who have reasonably attractive pictures or well-written profiles. Getting more conversational may help, but there's also an extent to which this is a numbers game.

[nearly_takuan]

Didn't think it worth mentioning before, but, it's not just that I don't get replies. Generally you also get some kind of popup/notice when someone views your profile. There's also a list of people who have (unless they paid to do it invisibly, though I don't see the point in that).

Dunno about Wisp, but I almost never even get anyone to look at my profile after I send a message. (They aren't zombies, either; their "last online" field always shows something recent enough that they would have at least seen the message header.)

So, I have a hard time believing they just made an informed decision about compatibility based on a thumbnail graphic and the phrasing of some surface level easy questions about their profile. Only way that works is if they actually do look but because I sent a message or whatever I don't get the note saying they looked.

But yeah, I try not to think of them as people. Helps with not taking it personally.

[eselle28]

(unless they paid to do it invisibly, though I don't see the point in that).

The service that you pay for is browsing invisibly while still being able to see your own visitors. Free users can browse invisibly. They just can't see who visits their profiles. I browse in this mode, because I like being able to browse invisibly and also because seeing who looks at my profile has been disturbing in the past. I wouldn't be surprised if you're encountering women who choose to browse invisibly as well.

[The Wisp]

Didn't think it worth mentioning before, but, it's not just that I don't get replies. Generally you also get some kind of popup/notice when someone views your profile. There's also a list of people who have (unless they paid to do it invisibly, though I don't see the point in that).

Dunno about Wisp, but I almost never even get anyone to look at my profile after I send a message. (They aren't zombies, either; their "last online" field always shows something recent enough that they would have at least seen the message header.)

So, I have a hard time believing they just made an informed decision about compatibility based on a thumbnail graphic and the phrasing of some surface level easy questions about their profile. Only way that works is if they actually do look but because I sent a message or whatever I don't get the note saying they looked.

But yeah, I try not to think of them as people. Helps with not taking it personally.

Well, my experience is a small sample size, but still. No responses, only one of the five visiting my profile (though others maybe invisible). I'm probably going to send off another round of messages today. I'm feeling down, though, because I initially messaged the ladies who I felt I was most compatible with (who I also found physically attractive, but I don't have super high standards there). Probably another 5 messages, and I'll have literally messaged all the attractive compatible ladies in my area and age range.

[nonA]

Dunno about Wisp, but I almost never even get anyone to look at my profile after I send a message. (They aren't zombies, either; their "last online" field always shows something recent enough that they would have at least seen the message header.)

This sounds like a demographics thing, since I can get a fair number of people viewing my profile just from viewing theirs. Doesn't necessarily lead anywhere, but I can say that message read rates should be close to 100%, and that most people who read a message will at least be curious enough to take a peek at your profile.

(The exception being the hottest girls, where simply reading all their mail would be a huge time sink. Nerd-hot probably gets more attention than party girl hot on dating sites, but with a bit of practice you can learn where it's a numbers game vs. where it's all about your game.)

To repeat what Takuan and Wisp (and countless other boys - the in-house OKC forums get a surprising number of them for an effectively mothballed place) are saying, the simple fact is that "be polite, be grammatically sound, mention something in their profile, ask a question" sort of commonsense advice doesn't work. If something doesn't work, it's worth acknowledging the failure rate and asking what might be more effective.

[BasedBuzzed]

Perhaps matching profile tone could work?

If profile mentions lots of smileys, add smileys. If profile is a bit rambly throw in a run-on sentence. If profile mentions hating clichés, toss in a few lampshades. Sort of mirroring behaviour but in text.

I have no idea how to to support this theory except by some patterns in FB messsages with dudettes I like(d).

[kath]

But yeah, I try not to think of them as people. Helps with not taking it personally.

... I find that disconcerting ...

(I get "I try not to think about them", but "I try not to think about them as people" is ... *shivers*)

[nearly_takuan]

Try is the word; I don't always succeed. But really, they're data. I don't anthropomorphize other forms of data. It's weird that I would default to thinking of the data as part of the person who wrote it, or the person as meaning anything to me.

[eselle28]

It sounds like some of the folks here might be dealing with limited numbers of people they want to message due to age/location/compatibility issues? If that's the case, I can very much identify with that. I'm not sure if this will help you guys, but one thing that helps me is to remember that the 5 or 6 guys who seem compatible with me and who are attractive to me (and who aren't relatives, coworkers, or exes) at a given time aren't the only people or even the only OkCupid users out there. People leave the site, new people move to the area, and people decide to give online dating a(nother) shot. When I've exhausted my current options, sometimes I put online dating down for a couple months and take another look a month or two later to see who's new. It is hard to play a numbers game when there are a limited number of people available, but changing the timetable can help with that.

[The Wisp]

It sounds like some of the folks here might be dealing with limited numbers of people they want to message due to age/location/compatibility issues? If that's the case, I can very much identify with that. I'm not sure if this will help you guys, but one thing that helps me is to remember that the 5 or 6 guys who seem compatible with me and who are attractive to me (and who aren't relatives, coworkers, or exes) at a given time aren't the only people or even the only OkCupid users out there. People leave the site, new people move to the area, and people decide to give online dating a(nother) shot. When I've exhausted my current options, sometimes I put online dating down for a couple months and take another look a month or two later to see who's new. It is hard to play a numbers game when there are a limited number of people available, but changing the timetable can help with that.

Yeah, that's where I'm at. There are probably like three women left who I want to message. Maybe one will pan out, but probably not considering getting 1 in 10 messages back is apparently really good.

A longer timetable is probably more healthy. I live in an area with lots of people in my age range, so there are probably going to be new reasonably compatible people every once in a while.

[Sponsored content]