Input: ASD Dating Site/Subject-based dating

Page 1 of 1 [ 8 posts ] 

dvorak29
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Posts: 6

18 Oct 2014, 12:10 pm

Hey everyone,

I am currently working on a dating site for people with Asperger's that is subject-based. It will have an emphasis on hobbies and communication, making it different from other sites. You can search for people with the same interests as you, and matches will be provided. I am looking for input from the community to determine other features that users will want. The site can also be used just for making friends, it is a little bit of everything! :)

I feel very passionate regarding this project, and I hope it can make a difference in the world of online dating. I myself have only stayed with dating sites for a day, then left. I want to make people that sign up feel at home.

Any input is greatly appreciated. Thanks!



rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,495
Location: Sweden

18 Oct 2014, 12:42 pm

Ideas for neurodiverse online dating sites? Yeah, I could give you those, but you probably won't like them. :-)

First, I think any "matching" between people should be based on geographic position (they need to be able to meet), and possibly personality-factors (communication style, other preferences). The results and why people are matched should not be presented.

Second, since there is no chit-chat on social status and position in neurodiversity, there is no need for people to chit-chat with each others prior to meeting IRL (this also intervenes with the normal courtship process that is non-verbal).

Third, the actual matching (dating) process is quite simple. The site will present the two people selected to each others, by giving them each others pictures, and an (approximate) position of where they live (but nothing else). Profiles on the site should not be public. They will then need to negotiate a time and place where they want to meet. In order to handle shy people in a good way, people should be able to negotiate that they will be at a particular place but do not want immediate verbal or physical contact. They can then negotiate new meetings from the site until they eventually want to handle it by themselves.

In the negotiation process, they will be required to follow a formal procedure. For instance, they can select type of meeting (like traditional date or non-verbal distance observation), and then suggest a time and a place to the system. That would avoid early verbal communication for people that don't want this. If the two don't fancy each others or cannot agree on type of date and place, they can decide to reject dating.

If people violate negotiated rules, they should be permanently banned to avoid predators. Banned profiles could be made public so neurodiverse people could avoid them everywhere.

An alternative scenario for people that live too far from each others, is to setup webcam contact instead of IRL meetings. That could work for some shy people as well, provided they are comfortable with showing themselves on webcams.

On second thought, I think every first meeting should be observation only. I wouldn't want to start a traditional date with somebody I knew nothing about, but observing them would be fine with anybody. Thus, the system would pick "observation" for any new date, and then both parties need to approve of other types of meetings before they can be negotiated.



Densaugeo
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 25 Oct 2010
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 184

19 Oct 2014, 3:43 pm

So when I Google 'neurodiverse dating site' the first hit is OkCupid. Not really what I was looking for...

This is an interesting idea, but there's two big challenges (that I know of):

1) How do you get people to join when there aren't very many people on it (a.k.a. the network effect)?

2) On most dating sites, conversations are started by men messaging women, and a small number of men send a very large number of messages. This means most messages women receive are from deceptive players, while the other men must work very hard to be heard above the noise.

I've heard Tinder doesn't have nearly as much trouble with problem #2 because they don't allow messaging until after both parties show interest. I'll be trying it out soon.

Problem #1 is a little harder. It'd be a game changer if you found a way for a dating site to connect members with non-members, perhaps through existing services like Facebook or even e-mail.



rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,495
Location: Sweden

19 Oct 2014, 3:55 pm

Densaugeo wrote:
1) How do you get people to join when there aren't very many people on it (a.k.a. the network effect)?


Link to popular sites.

Densaugeo wrote:
2) On most dating sites, conversations are started by men messaging women, and a small number of men send a very large number of messages. This means most messages women receive are from deceptive players, while the other men must work very hard to be heard above the noise.


Simple. You don't allow anybody to message anybody.



Cheesecake
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 3 Mar 2015
Posts: 6
Location: Here or aspienation.com

08 Mar 2015, 6:20 am

Another site I joined has this - aspienation.com but I think it's just starting out. It's a bit like WrongPlanet with forums but you can also view singles, message them etc. It will probably be better when/if it gets more members.

There was another one I came across a while ago too, forgot the name, something like Aspie Affections? It didn't work for me though, seemed to not want to work!



biostructure
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,451

14 Apr 2015, 6:48 pm

So rdos, you imagine a "first date" being people just staring at/"observing" each other with minimal verbal communication, and not even a shared activity? That sounds awkward. It's one thing when two people are at a party/dinner/whatever and strike up a conversation because there the two people too introverted/atypical to talk with anyone else, but I think that two people online would only want to meet if they've already established there is something they can do/talk about together, don't you?



starkid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,121
Location: California

14 Apr 2015, 10:15 pm

Half of rdos' suggestions are complete nonsense. No chatting before a date, match results that only consist of pictures (no profile text?!) and approximate location, and matching based on geography (nevermind personality or people who are willing to relocate)? Ridiculous.


_________________
Assume nothing, question everything.
DX Central Auditory Processing Deficit


Antharis
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 84
Location: Land of Colours and Night

15 Apr 2015, 1:44 am

From what I've gathered from reading this forum about dating sites is, complaints usually arise from what you're not allowed to do, so conversely maybe the more things you're allowed to do the better.
If people want to search for others with the same or different interests, let them.
If people want to search for people near or away from them, sure.
Let them take control of their own search by accounting for as many variables as possible, from geography to pubic scaping tendencies.
Dispense with the multiple choice answers and let them type what they think.
Allow users to ask their own questions.
Public chat channels, if you can deal with the headache of monitoring them, may allow connections between people that find traits in each other that they didn't realize they liked? This one is almost a stretch but it's worth considering.
The only thing I would completely want gone is the ability to mass mail. People that do the dandelion approach, treating their profiles as resumes and messages as cover letters can just go floss with barbed wire.

The biggie here though, is whether you can actually find a way to force a honest profile, whether it is through a specific type of questions , psychometrics, questions that disappear or change when you want to manipulate the result, or just finding questions that cannot be manipulated for a specific result. I don't know how you would go about this but maybe others would be more knowledgeable.