thirtyplus
Don Juan
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2007
- Messages
- 108
- Reaction score
- 1
Feel free to move if posted in the wrong forum.
I've been playing around on the internet lately. Haven't done the whole "social networking" or dating site thing for a while so I thought I'd mess around a bit and see what fell out.
Two observations before I get to the good stuff:
1) Most women who are spending time looking for love on the internet don't measure up to the attractiveness level of your average woman on the street. It's a truism that bears repeating: if a woman is hot, normal, and stable(ish), she's getting offers for sex left and right from random guys in real life. She doesn't NEED to go to the internet. So it never occurs to her. The type of women who NEED to go to the internet for sex are usually deficient in some way: either they don't have teh social skills, or the looks, or have a stigma associated with them (single mom, too old, etc).
2) The real state-of-the-art for dating sites right now is OkCupid. Myspace is over*****d, Facebook is far too cliquish, Match and True are too corporate and paid, and Craigslist is too "dirty" (in my experience). YMMV.
DISCLAIMER: I have gotten laid off the internet a few times before (craigslist and myspace, back in the day) and met probably a dozen women off the internet. None were spectacular but nor were that horrible.
So, the scene is OkCupid. To get anywhere you have to basically answer 1-200 survey questions. Then the system decides a "compatibility" score between you and other users (50%, 87%, etc) based on how many questions you answered similarly. It also tells you your "friend" compatability (non-sexual, I guess) and "enemy" percentage (where you disagree. I've answered 200 questions and most girls I contact are between 50-60% compatible according to the system, about 70% friend and 10-20% enemy.
The site has a "woo" function (similar to a "poke" or "wink" or whatever) but I don't bother with it.
I start with a basic c+f email, short and sweet:
A typical reply:
Okay, right away we can tell that this girl has done this before. She knows the roadmap and is moving down it without ado.
In this particular case I bit since she was offering her digits so quickly:
I text her 24 hours later, and the text convo goes on for about 4 hours on and off. I'm multi-tasking through this. Convo gets very sexual very quickly, which initially throws me off, to the point that the girl at one point says:
Just another point of evidence for NEVER going backwards in the seductive process.
So at first I was thrown, off, I responded with a neg and basically threw out some sarcasm. we got right back on track talking about sex..
And this is the message that you should be getting: if a girl offers her number in her first message, and proceeds to start asking detailed sexual questions, she is horny and wants it ASAP. She is also probably VERY ACCUSTOMED To getting it from guys over the internet.
(After meeting her I later confirmed this: she has met and slept with a good # of guys from the internet).
That's why I say roadmap. She knew the roadmap and was just unwinding it; I was behind the ball and digging my heels in, which is why I was caught by surprise. This is an interesting lesson in reverse to think about with respect to girls; often WE know the roadmap very well, as skilled seducers, but THEY might not be so comfortable and be put off if we move along too quickly.
So the next day she texts me, I tell her to come cook me dinner (she's a chef by trade) she asks for a phone call, I call her. We spend about 3 hours on the phone.
By now you'll have noticed something else: we've spent 7 hours combined in texts / phone. It's pretty commonly accepted that 7 hours is the minimum average time investment for a girl to sleep with you. Happens to be a moot point in this case; I did go over to her apartment to meet up with her, but she was about 1-2 points lower on the HB scale than her internet pictures suggested, so I beat a hasty retreat.
Now I remember why I stopped messing around on the Internet
still, take what lessons you can from my experience.
I've been playing around on the internet lately. Haven't done the whole "social networking" or dating site thing for a while so I thought I'd mess around a bit and see what fell out.
Two observations before I get to the good stuff:
1) Most women who are spending time looking for love on the internet don't measure up to the attractiveness level of your average woman on the street. It's a truism that bears repeating: if a woman is hot, normal, and stable(ish), she's getting offers for sex left and right from random guys in real life. She doesn't NEED to go to the internet. So it never occurs to her. The type of women who NEED to go to the internet for sex are usually deficient in some way: either they don't have teh social skills, or the looks, or have a stigma associated with them (single mom, too old, etc).
2) The real state-of-the-art for dating sites right now is OkCupid. Myspace is over*****d, Facebook is far too cliquish, Match and True are too corporate and paid, and Craigslist is too "dirty" (in my experience). YMMV.
DISCLAIMER: I have gotten laid off the internet a few times before (craigslist and myspace, back in the day) and met probably a dozen women off the internet. None were spectacular but nor were that horrible.
So, the scene is OkCupid. To get anywhere you have to basically answer 1-200 survey questions. Then the system decides a "compatibility" score between you and other users (50%, 87%, etc) based on how many questions you answered similarly. It also tells you your "friend" compatability (non-sexual, I guess) and "enemy" percentage (where you disagree. I've answered 200 questions and most girls I contact are between 50-60% compatible according to the system, about 70% friend and 10-20% enemy.
The site has a "woo" function (similar to a "poke" or "wink" or whatever) but I don't bother with it.
I start with a basic c+f email, short and sweet:
That gets a reply of some type about 1/3rd of the time. From experiments with MySpace I think this is pretty typical for a social networking site.
A typical reply:
Notice how quick that hook was, she's offering her # and IM right off the bat.
Okay, right away we can tell that this girl has done this before. She knows the roadmap and is moving down it without ado.
In this particular case I bit since she was offering her digits so quickly:
Next message she gave me her #.haha. I text like a 16 year old girl. gimme your # and I might just give you sum gum
I text her 24 hours later, and the text convo goes on for about 4 hours on and off. I'm multi-tasking through this. Convo gets very sexual very quickly, which initially throws me off, to the point that the girl at one point says:
Guys, always take her seriously when she starts using proper grammar, spelling and punctuation. I was majorly miscalibrated here, still throwing up screens and being vague to attract her interest, when clearly she was way past that point and wanted me to be telling her detailed sexual stuff.
Just another point of evidence for NEVER going backwards in the seductive process.
So at first I was thrown, off, I responded with a neg and basically threw out some sarcasm. we got right back on track talking about sex..
And this is the message that you should be getting: if a girl offers her number in her first message, and proceeds to start asking detailed sexual questions, she is horny and wants it ASAP. She is also probably VERY ACCUSTOMED To getting it from guys over the internet.
(After meeting her I later confirmed this: she has met and slept with a good # of guys from the internet).
That's why I say roadmap. She knew the roadmap and was just unwinding it; I was behind the ball and digging my heels in, which is why I was caught by surprise. This is an interesting lesson in reverse to think about with respect to girls; often WE know the roadmap very well, as skilled seducers, but THEY might not be so comfortable and be put off if we move along too quickly.
So the next day she texts me, I tell her to come cook me dinner (she's a chef by trade) she asks for a phone call, I call her. We spend about 3 hours on the phone.
By now you'll have noticed something else: we've spent 7 hours combined in texts / phone. It's pretty commonly accepted that 7 hours is the minimum average time investment for a girl to sleep with you. Happens to be a moot point in this case; I did go over to her apartment to meet up with her, but she was about 1-2 points lower on the HB scale than her internet pictures suggested, so I beat a hasty retreat.
Now I remember why I stopped messing around on the Internet
still, take what lessons you can from my experience.