A seemingly obvious solution is to limit the number of women that men can contact, something like 2 every 24 hours. That way men are incentivized to put some effort into their messages, and women actually have an opportunity to read them due to reduced spam. It should be a win-win for everyone except the spammers, but I haven't heard of any sites that do it.
Now I have N accounts and message whoever I like with those N accounts.
Basically, a site has to offer something to both women and men to do better than OKC. That proposal just puts a minor speed bump in front of men. As a group, men have few compunctions about abusing sites in order to get what they want. Multiple accounts to spam women is not a significant obstacle.
Nah. Someone writes a script. It becomes a browser extension. Now it's zero work. Women abandon your site, because the experience is no better than OKCupid. Men follow suit, because they tend to go where the women are.
Basically, your approach is the functional equivalent of DRM. With all the problems that go with that.
That still takes effort beyond just signing up. I think you're overestimating the willingness of the average guy to either script something up or go out of his way to find a browser extension. Most people's knowledge of browser extensions begins and ends with AdBlock anyway.
> men discovered that being a well-behaved actor is a losing strategy on dating sites.
The entire seduction and pickup community is based on the idea that women say they want a guy who's nice and plays by the rules but that that isn't what they respond to. They respond to assholes, bad-boys and dominant men. Obviously not every woman, but there are plenty of independent scientific studies to support this theory.
I'm aware of those studies, but skeptical of some of their methods and claims. I'm especially skeptical that when they claim causation and not correlation.
In any case, there's a big difference between 'spammer' and 'bad-boy' as well as a big difference between demonstrating the success of a strategy and demonstrating it's prevalence.
Edit: There may be some good studies demonstrating causation but I am not familiar with them.
So I went and googled this "#NotAllMen" tag you keep mentioning (I don't use twitter). The "but we're not all like that" response is inappropriate and unhelpful when one is talking about particular bad actors, a group of bad actors or even about a general form of behavior.
However, when the statements are of the general form about the group as a whole, I think it is a perfectly appropriate response. If you say "All men are misogynists" saying "no we aren't" is perfectly valid, so is taking offense to the statement.
Now if you have evidence that your assertion applies to the majority of men on dating sites, feel free to post it. Then at least your stereotype will be an evidence backed one.
