Instead of spending so much time with some weird scheme in an attempt to put down the "hunks," how about just becoming a more attractive and more interesting person on your own? Newsflash, guys: women are attracted to confidence and a sense of self-worth, among other things, not complex mechanisms to distract the other guys.
There are two ways to be the biggest building. One is to tear down the other buildings. Or two, just build the biggest building.
- Gary V
Sorry, but this is just really strange, and the lack of ANY negative feedback on here or Reddit is even more disconcerting.
So you know the three sentence opener that is going to compensate for a less than attractive picture?
Let's hear it.
Or is your answer just a stand-in to let you morally condemn these others?
In person, one can project confidence, intelligence, humor etc. Online, being unique is bit harder, not just because someone can copy your words but also because you get to use far fewer of them before a decision is made.
I'm not condemning or condoning the original post. But it's telling that a lot of condemnations for "gaming the dating system" that I hear are prefaced by "it's easy, just become more confident/relax/be yourself". Supply-and-demand says that the common measure of "success" in dating aren't inherently easy. They might not be desirable either but that's a different story.
I think online dating with photo does create a real quandary because it gives one very little time and thus makes the likely winners more based on immediate visual factors.
It's very simple and clear cut: he distorted the truth in order for him to get an advantage and put others at a disadvantage. There is no greater good behind the lie, it's just self-interest.
If you read my post closely, I hope you'll find that I objected to the "you don't have to do that, there's an easy other way" part. If the poster had just said, "don't cheat, it may be the only way to win this game but you shouldn't do it, it's wrong", well I'd just pass over that comment entirely.
If, for nothing else, the guy stands out for cleverness.
So this is a typical case of someone breaking the rules, getting away with it (even getting commended!) and then wanting to break the rules on a larger scale.
The whole society works by lies. Sure, they have different names - omission, bluff, exaggeration and so on - but in the end they are still lies and everyone is using them.
If, of course, you confessed everything and left no false pretenses.
As the poet said: all is fair in love and war.
I think the gist of the quote is, in love and war folks fall from the path more often than in less important things. Don't think even John Lyly thought it was moral.
So we can't condemn this unless we have an alternate suggestion for those that can't get any? "I'm not getting any, so immoral hacks are OK"? You could use the same argument to justify rape.
You could, most people would reject such reasoning.
The vast majority of people in dating situations are less than 100% honest. The vast majority of people are also not rapists. This suggests to me that most people do in fact see dishonesty as being different from rape.
Simple condemnation of their deception would have ended after the first paragraph. Continuing on to say "it's easy, just be yourself" supports the implicit rule that unattractive males of mediocre net worth don't deserve physical affection.
Or maybe it's just because "LOLOL ONLINE DATING< WHAT LOSERS!" isn't very constructive. Different people meet people in different ways. I've done it both ways: it's all pretty much the same thing in the end.
Just because you use a website to meet people does not mean that you're some kind of troglodyte whose skin is burned by the sun.
Besides, doing _both_ would increase your chances even more...
As if girls never do a "denial of service" attack to guys when they are competing for the same guy. Like not inviting their hotter friend along when they are first meeting each other.
PS: Do you find Hitch (the character in the movie) a creepy liar?
Really? You wouldn't mind messaging a bunch of profiles, receiving no responses, only to later find out that they weren't even real people? That no matter how much time you spent carefully composing your messages, you might as well have directed them to /dev/null?
Seems pretty cruel to me. And once other people start adopting the same strategy, it'll render dating sites useless for everyone. Ultimately the sites will be forced to ask for some kind of proof of identity.
Secondly, I didn't say it wasn't cruel at all. I was saying that this guy lied to OTHER GUYS, and not to the object of his affection. It's like walking into a bar, showing up all the other guys, and getting the girl. Many of them, if given the chance, would have done the same to him.
And finally ... sometimes even "lying" to the girl (or rather playing / flirting with her) can be charming. See Hitch the movie as he gets the girl in one of the early bar scenes, when she is surrounded by guys, by getting her all emotionally riled up and chasing him ... right out of the group of guys. She appreciated his efforts.
Maybe she deserved it, being shallow and horny. But that doesn't speak to the morality of it at all.
if this girl wasn't at least into this guy, and wasn't getting any prospects messaging her, she could've gone looking actively herself and found the exact same guys in the area.
Furthermore, its not the lady that he was messing with. Its the guys that were on the wild-goose chase. He approached this woman in the normal manner.
I don't know, even if she knew, she might give him an A for effort.
If someone were to do that, it would destroy my confidence in them. The whole relationship has started with a lie, no matter if I like them or not.
> The whole relationship has started with a lie
Should I be worried that my relationship 'started with bribery' because I handed the maitre'd $20 to get us a good table?
Maybe next time someone will pay $50 - because it is not something to worry about,no? - and you'll have to wait 15 minutes to get a seat.
Well. At least we are past the kidnapping and rape stage that was still common a couple centuries ago...
Really, the courtship ritual is a game. The women look for traits they desire, but these traits are expensive, so (some) men attempt to fake the traits. The women adapt, the men adapt. It's basically an evolutionary arms race, but about sex, because the reproductive & evolutionary interests of males and females when it comes to mate selection are diametrically opposed.
Everybody is 7 foot high jock on teh internetz. Everybody is lying and people discount for that. So unless you lie a bit you started loosing your ground even if you are otherwise the tallest building. Take your moralism somewhere else - cuz. this is teh internetz (and its serious business too!)
You remind me of people who keep whining about cheezy tactics in games - they are there so use them. Have you ever heard that winners are those who are willing to do stuff, losers won't?
He then used this fake profile to message the girls he was interested in. Pretty much every woman opened up their souls, dreams, and wishes to this fake Cassanova. He then uses this inside information to make his real self more interesting and the conversation more engaging when he messages them and goes on dates.
Unless they are teens, that's like a hack 'how to avoid natural human communication'. Nevertheless, I wish them good luck in dating experience.
The point is that dating outside of your social circle is a numbers game. You will be seeing the averages most of the time, and most people are simply not worth your time. At least that's the impression I've been left with after playing around with this stuff in different places the last year.
As to whether playing games like this is pointless or not...if you're looking for the love of your life, then probably yes. But if you're looking for sex and short-term, uncommitted relationships, games like these are the best way to get what you want! I see this as just a natural extension of all the phoniness that happens in night clubs. The point is, playing games works! You'd be horrified at how many women, especially under 30, treat dating as a game..and have the most stupid reactions as a result. These people are probably not worth investing too much time in, but they do represent the average person you will meet. Which is really sad, but it's the impression you'll be left with after going out a lot.
Second of all, IRL or online, for me it's about doing it the natural way - you know - talk to people. That's what dating online on dating websites should look like, but from the ammount of 'hacks' and 'howtos' I read about, seems it isn't. If I'm to waste my time playing against bunches of creepos with armies of fake accounts instead of socializing with real girls - sorry, I'm out.
Saying that "not everyone you like will be attracted to you" is a very nice way of putting it
Aren't you replying here to ZoFreX's post above, which is not mine? :)
The thing is, outside the limited context of completely no-strings flirting, it's really disappointing to see these things work. It's so phony. Maybe some girls feel the same thing the first time they dress up really revealing and all the guys treat them differently.
Seems some people just aren't happy with the poor response rates on dating sites, but that's just how it goes... not everyone you find attractive will find you attractive. I imagine that the "cheating" method wouldn't produce better long term results, as not cheating means those you talk to genuinely want to connect with you.
In the late 80's I did something similar with a Minitel-based chat system. It required a bunch of computers and a couple phone lines.
This is the problem that I have with both of these pseudo-hacks. Both persons are liars and cheaters, which is socially not accepted, except when dating apparently...
Best was to call up the ceo on his personal homephone every night at 3am, until they knew what he sounded like raving mad.
Then they called up the admins doing a very good impression of the irate ceo demanding his passwords were reset there and then. Worked a stupid amount of times apparently...
So yes, lying can be hacking and hacking can be lying.
That is gold...
Now I want to be a whitehat pentester even more than I did before.
One of the things that makes hacking possible is that the actual rules are different than the stated rules.
I suppose calling it engineering does make one feel better though... it almost sounds like something positive.
For an amusing view of how the world would be without the lying, watch the movie The Invention of Lying.
And then there are lies like the one in this example. Where not only the lie is self-serving, but it had the potential to hurt other people. Imagine you're one of the other guys using the service and you try to talk to one of those fake profiles. You get your hopes up and then the fake profile cuts communication or plays a practical joke and invites you on a date. Don't you think that's at least a little cruel?
Lying is a tool, it can be used for good or bad.
That's precisely the point. Here lying was done for personal gains.
Why are your examples cruel?
Someone learns that they need to address their weight problems before it affects their health badly or if they want to woo you or whatever.
Someone else learns that they receive presents not because they've been good but because people regard them; I was going to say love instead of regard but that's not always true.
Sure you can say things in cruel ways ...
Ok, not hard to imagine. I'm using the service, I message one of those fake profiles (amongst the other multiple of profiles I message). I get no response, figure she is not interested and move on (just like most other messages to profiles).
Yes I think it's cruel if they used them to play jokes. Worse yet is that I know people who are using this for financial gain. They setup fake profiles in dating sites, and respond with messages containing premium rate phone lines. They made millions, got fined in one country but the profits made elsewhere made up for that.
Article says: "My two friends operated the 50 accounts while I found the prettiest ..."
If you're good you can get what you want without making any assertive statements whatsoever, just by using the right tone of voice.
Helping smart people procreate could be considered "greater good"
Keep in mind the targets are not passive ones and if they actually engaged in a relationship with those folks, it was because they wanted it. I never went to a second date with a girl I didn't like.
Not at all different from putting up fake ads in Google, and counting the number of hits.
Turn-about is fair play if you aren't going to be straight-up about things.
Another analogy would be like finding a way to make sure that your resume isn't one of the ones that is immediately thrown out by some HR person before being forwarded to the hiring manager. The hiring manager still gets to evaluate you based on your skills, but you just made sure that he/she even looked at your skills (vs being cut from the list for some arbitrary reason).
On the other hand, a girl having her best friend hit on you to see if you'll cheat demonstrates a fundamental lack of trust in the relationship. Regardless of the outcome, she's already demonstrated that she doesn't feel that she can trust you. This is a far deeper cut than convincing all of the extremely 'hunky' guys at a bar to leave (for some reason or another; maybe spread a rumor that the bar next door is giving away power tools or hair gel or something) so that you even have a chance with some of the attractive women there.
For some reason, it's just the 'pretending to be someone that you are not on the internet' that makes people throw up the 'creepy' flag. If I was to pretend to be someone that I'm not in real life, people would not immediately think that I was creepy. Hell, society seems to celebrate guys that lie about how successful they are in order to impress women.
However, I have a feeling that the intersection of the sets "Guys who meet girls through large-scale subterfuge" and "guys who get deceptively set up by their fiancees" is not large enough to be worth addressing in a comment like that.
If that happened to you, it's one woman who did it, not "they".
I guess I took the "when" as a colloquial "if" - if your reading was more literal then I suppose I can see why you're upset.
Than I realized what you really meant.
Now that I think about it, maybe relationships aren't the goal of this kind of behavior in the first place, so maybe this whole thread is a really bad idea for HN.
I did however, just spend some time talking with my attractive single sister-in-law about dirty guy tricks in the dating scene. She's pretty broad-minded, so I don't think she represents every woman, but I liked her attitude.
She said something like: "Girls stuff their bras, and play all sorts of mind-games to get guys to like them. I would consider social engineering fair turnabout, man! The guys are way behind in this area!"
This is only that start of it. If you think date-engineering is something typically done by creepy men, you may want to reconsider.
So, how can I get her number?
As a commenter further down notes he knew a guy that employed a similar strategy with newspaper personal ads to get people to come to his bands gigs.
Or is it ok if those other people were jocks? What if they weren't jocks? What if it was you and you couldn't get a date because of them?
+ most women get something like 200 messages a week..so even if the numbers went down, they'd still have plenty of messages.
Granted it might work somewhere in the middle of Montana with 20,000 people within 200 miles.
With 50 impossibly (fake) hot chicks on the radar and only 30 real ones who probably fall below the 50 on the scale, that would give our boys more than enough time to seal the deal
It's a great scene.
Will this approach work on the job offers websites?
The server is temporarily unable to service your request. Please try again later.
You commented solely to complain about the main post. Your comment added no more information than a flag would have.
Your comment was completely generic. It made no specific argument against the link except to disparage reddit. The stereotypical HN reader prides himself on being the type of person who'd appreciate clever, insightful material even from /b/, let alone from reddit.
Also, I realize English is not your first language, but it's the lingua franca of this site; and your English was distractingly poor.