

Ask HN: Disrupting online dating - valid thoughts? - dsplittgerber
http://nullrisiko.biz/daniel/2009/06/10/its-neither-the-chicken-nor-the-egg-thoughts-on-disrupting-online-dating-business-models/

======
marvin
I don't think "online dating" will ever work. Sexual attraction isn't about
the kind of rational things you can communicate over our current, low-
bandwidth digital connections. It is well and good to describe your
personality with words and pictures, but in most cases it isn't enough. It
might even be counterproductive for people who are unable to look good in a
photograph.

The things described in the linked post (commonalities) _are_ important parts
of dating and attraction, but initial attraction is much more about the subtle
things: Body language, subtle personality cues like clothing and hair style,
all sorts of instant non-verbal communication, social proof etc. So either you
have to remove these factors from the equation entirely (I can't really see
how to do this) or you have to make an arena where they can be properly
expressed.

This would mean, essentially, arranging real-life encounters where everybody
has a decent chance at relaxing and being themselves. The thing is, nightclubs
do a pretty good job at this already. The biggest solvable problem of
nightclubs is differentiation; if you go to a nightclub you invariably meet
the outgoing, confident, secure club crowd. It's always a high-pressure arena.
But actually, relaxing and being yourself around strangers is pretty damn
difficult as it is.

This is just the basic human part of the problem. But there are much deeper
issues to think about. Sexuality and relationships are a very sore and
difficult part of human nature, and it is never rational. There are chaotic,
unmapped social issues here as well; for example a lot of women are interested
in sex just for the physical thrill but have a huge social barrier against
casual relationships. On the casual dating scene, this manifests itself as a
series of games of playing hard-to-get, blaming alcohol for a successful one-
night-stand, etc. I don't think _anyone_ has the vaguest idea of all the other
similar, irrational cultural norms that will bite you in the ass if you try to
tame this problem.

Online dating is difficult because

+It is hard to convey your personality over an internet connection

+No one is able to tell you what you're doing wrong, since the rational and
quantifiable part of dating is so small

+There are a lot of unmapped social and human behaviors that will fuck things
up

Basically, I'd just try to tackle some difficult technical field instead.
Human sexuality is too chaotic and hard to quantify.

However, I _do_ like your idea of using an existing social network to
bootstrap the thing. It is the best solution of the chicken/egg-problem I have
heard.

~~~
menloparkbum
_arranging real-life encounters where everybody has a decent chance at
relaxing and being themselves. The thing is, nightclubs do a pretty good job
at this already_

I don't know where you live but I've never been to a relaxing nightclub where
everyone was encouraged to be themselves. In fact, it's almost the opposite: a
loud stressful environment where everyone is dressed up and trying to be
someone they aren't.

To meet women at a nightclub you are pretty much taking a shotgun approach.
You need to have no shame and be the guy with the most cocaine. Online, you
just need a decent photograph and a funny profile and the women will come to
you.

------
menloparkbum
Your idea is pretty good. I signed up for OK Cupid a while back and repurposed
the photos and certain other information from my FB profile. It would have
been nice to just auto-import.

I would take a look at OK Cupid, if you haven't. The other dating sites like
Match or eHarmony seem very "find your future husband or wife" oriented. The
other end of the scale, AdultFriendFinder or even the Onion / Nerve personals
are very ghetto/spammy and seem to be best suited for ugly people into weird
sex stuff, or actual prostitutes.

OK Cupid has worked out very well for me in finding people who just want to go
out on a few dates and have fun without the pretense of sizing me up for
marriage or whether or not I'll fit into a harness in the dungeon.

If there was an iPhone app for OkCupid it would be nearly perfect. (for actual
"dating.")

~~~
stcredzero
The tech-savvy ex-hipster geek-trash I know in Houston all love Ok Cupid. But
they use it heavily for the sort of social networking that Facebook is suppoed
to be for. (It's apparently better than Facebook for finding people with
similar esoteric interests.)

On the flip side, Facebook & Friendster started out as surreptitious dating
sites. People went on there to figure out who among their friend's friends
were cute enough to date.

~~~
dsplittgerber
Your last point raises an interesting question - when the current business
model of social networking sites is "keeping in touch with people you know",
might a future business model be: "Helping you find people you don't know but
will find useful - for work, dating or sports"?

~~~
thecougar
For the dating piece, wonder if a "bounty" model might make sense. i.e. I will
pay a matchmaker $1 to introduce me to a potential match (if I agree it is a
good match based on some preliminary info about the person).

------
dsplittgerber
I am not sure if this is ok to post - I checked the guidelines but found
nothing against this. If there is some kind of policy against for feedback
like this, I will delete my post. This is definitely not meant to be some kind
of ad, just an honest wish for feedback on my conceptual idea. I hope that's
ok?

I am new to HN, but Paul Graham had dating on his "ideas" list for startups he
would like to fund, so I thought HN might be a good place to discuss it.

~~~
TrevorJ
Yeah, seems like a good submission.

A couple thoughts:

People do pay to get into a certain building to meet other single people (I'm
thinking about nightclubs and bars that have cover charges here).

Also, your point about people mostly meeting partners through friends is valid
but the REAL question is does it happen this way becasue that's the 'best' way
to meet somebody or becasue it's currently one of the biggest ways humans meet
new people? In other words, does it work this way becasue this way works best,
or does it work this way because it just happens to provide the most chances?

That being said, your assessment of the problem is solid. It's an idea worth
honing in on. The one thing you'd want to be able to hang onto from the
"walled garden" sites is the fact that everyone there has expressed interest
and availability for a dating relationship. This lowers the risk for those who
do the asking since you are less likely to get rebuffed in the "EW, I'm dating
already, thank you very much creepo!" sort of way.

~~~
dsplittgerber
Thanks for your feedback!

Great point about the most efficient way to meet a partner! This is indeed a
great question one should ask oneself. I see a problem with that approach
though: I guess many people don't want to mix 'efficiency' with dating and
human interactions and emotions too much. It's probably socially accepted to
use dating sites, but are we already on our way to rethink our entire approach
to dating?

The expression of interest is indeed a good concept to hang on to. Which is
why social networks are especially suitable for adding dating - you can add a
simple "are you open to dating approaches?"-setting.

~~~
TrevorJ
Agreed. In fact, I think getting 6 pages of profile to look through to try to
find somebody you may want to contact on a dating site is counterproductive
and probably frustrates people a lot.

At first I thought that maybe your idea subverts the role of the intermediate
players in our lives. (The people who go "Hey, I know this person you should
me, let me introduce you.") But what if you actually allowed that to happen in
the social 'net? Do you think it would be handy if you could anonymously
suggest to friend A and Friend B that they connect if they don't know each
other?

~~~
dsplittgerber
Good questions. What value do intermediate players provide?

Is it in them playing cupid or is it in them being a trustee? Why do people
who are introduced to each other go along and talk to the other one - is it
because they are interested in a stranger or because they trust the
intermediate player?

I tend to think it's the latter which is why anonymous suggestions may not
work. What do you think?

~~~
TrevorJ
Hmm, good question. If you knew it was through a mutual friend it could still
work, but maybe it should not be anonymous.

------
iloveyouocean
So I don't mean to spam this thread (I already posted as a response to another
comment), but I do want to encourage people to check out our disruptive online
dating startup: <http://flowmingle.com>

No profiles, no matchmaking tests. We built the site to be inherently social
and group oriented. We make no claims about 'finding love' or 'finding a
soulmate', our site is optimized to make introductions between like people,
help them set up a meeting, and then get out of the way.

Basically, we create small local groups of similar people an d then lead them
through a guided introduction process that lasts a week. At the end of the
week we help people connect and plan a meeting. Check us out.

------
revicon
... The big thing the article seems to skip over is the fact that people on an
online dating site are actually LOOKING to date someone. While people on your
friends of friends social network may or may not be. And approaching someone
online without that context established is considered creepy, and especially
so considering you're putting your 1st degree friend in the middle of it.

Someone may argue that the search should be restricted to facebook ppl with
"looking for guys/girls" checked in their profile, but in my experience almost
noone checks those for fear of looking desperate to their other friends.

~~~
dsplittgerber
Very good point - dating has so much to do with social perceptions. For a
stand-alone dating site, there is a serious problem here: people might not
want to contact suggested 'matches' out of fear of appearing creepy (this may
be subject to local customs though, at least to a certain extent?).

Tthis is why social networks are especially suitable for adding dating - you
can add a simple "are you open to dating approaches?"-setting, which is hidden
from view; a private setting used only for the dating functionality of the
social network. Do you think that would help?

~~~
revicon
Could be wrong here, but I doubt most people would enable that setting even if
they might actually be open to such a thing. In the same way people don't
check the "Can we contact you for feedback on our site" checkboxes etc.

Dating is a really really touchy subject when there are friends in the mix as
well. That's the great thing about dating sites, they are completely removed
from the rest of your social life.

I work for <insert really large internet company here>, and our dating site's
user namespace is completely removed from the rest of the social sphere we've
developed over our other properties, because in almost all cases, users don't
want anything they do regarding online dating to be mixed with what they do
elsewhere (This also applies to our online job site).

~~~
TheSOB88
True, people won't check that, but there's another indicator: the relationship
status. Nearly everyone keeps those up to date, especially if they actually
use the site.

~~~
DTrejo
On Facebook I leave my status blank and don't change it when I enter a
relationship. You're right though, most people keep it up to date.

------
radu_floricica
I always thought a good online dating site should have you _do_ stuff with
somebody else. Like playing a game and chatting at the same time, or talking
on a certain topic - stuff that would make initial interaction easier. I think
this is more important then selecting your best partner, and then just giving
you his/hers email address.

~~~
dsplittgerber
What's your rationale behind your proposal to force users to do stuff? Is it
to make initial conversation easier? Well, could be an icebreaker, that's
true. Do you think it comes across as sincere intermediation or as some kind
of forced thing both parties will rebel against?

~~~
TheSOB88
It's a way to find out what kind of person your 'opponent' is and to get to
know them, as well as to have fun, thus creating an emotional bond with them -
a reason to 'see' them again. A short, goofy game, akin to a Mario Party or
Wario Ware video game, would be perfect for this, I think.

~~~
eru
Check out <http://images.google.com/imagelabeler/>

The creator (or so) once told in an interview that people feel connected when
playing this game successfully together.

------
ErrantX
Well, there are plenty of social dating apps on Facebook at the moment. :) so
I guess the model works.

Making one cross network might not work so well: I wouldnt really see it
working for, say, linkedin (too business oriented), Twitter (lack of info),
Myspace (too young a crowd). Facebook would probably tend to be the target for
this model.

------
sayrer
"How it certainly doesn’t work is by going into a predefined building -
sometimes even with an access fee - and only finding potential partners in
there."

Actually, certain kinds of dating work exactly like this, and translate well
to the online model. It's just that most people don't want to live that way.

------
steveeq1
Yeah, funny, I was thinking of a similar principle. However, mine is slightly
different. You match people using collaborative filtering techniques based on
your social network profile (bayesian filtering, for example. . .). Then you
via gps on your cell phone. IE, if two likely matches happen to be
geographically close to each other, the cell phone tells both of you "hey, you
guys would be a good match . . . would you like to hook up at a nearby coffee
place?". If both say yes, the cell phone will allow you to meet at a local
coffee place (or whatever).

The point is is to have a weird excuse to interact briefly. Just by a brief
encounter one can know if that person is his/her type.

------
sosuke
Take a look at Zoosk for an example of your idea in action. It may not be a
one for one to what you envisioned but they are using social networking
applications to add users to a central dating site and seems to work fairly
well.

------
dusklight
fta:

"How it[real life] certainly doesn’t work is by going into a predefined
building - sometimes even with an access fee - and only finding potential
partners in there."

Sounds like the writer has never gone clubbing before ...

In other news, the writer has never used MySpace either (before it got
hijacked by spammers)

------
bored
Don't people do this already? Search through Facebook or Myspace pages for
compatible mates?

~~~
dsplittgerber
Might very well be. But there might as well be a business model in simplyfying
the process for them and making it a lot more efficient. What do you think?

------
kingkongrevenge
Online dating is a way to scam gullible lonely people. It works perfectly. No
need for improvement.

