Diff b/w personal and non-personal online dating 1st message

Post Reply New Topic

No, I do it, and I don't pay. I've no idea how common or uncommon it is, as I can't see who visits my profile either. I believe even if you pay, you still can't see anonymous browsers' visits.

I don't know how much clearer I can be in saying I didn't write my post to talk about the "common" and "average" and "usual".

So we should forget about the "common" and "average" girls and only focus on the "Special" Aspie girls on dating sites who the nearest might be 1000 km away , Right.

Where did I say that? Did you even read my original post?

Anyway, it looks as though my post has nothing useful for you, so you obviously can ignore it. Easy.

Last edited by yellowtamarin on 14 Mar 2016, 4:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

"Some people on this site might not be looking for the "average" girl, or even a female at all. I'm not trying to advise the masses, this isn't an NT forum."

I was being sarcastically over-dramatic though, you know ;p.

Yep, I said what I said in that quote. There was no need to misinterpret and phrase it a different way to make it sound like I'm saying something I'm not.

And what if you only send a copy/paste 'Hey, how are you? ' message to women who's profile and profile picture you are interested in on dating websites?

You'll have no way of knowing someone's intentions, randomly approached or approached for something they genuinely like, approached for a one-night stand, FWB or chance of getting to know someone for an LTR, or even just someone approaching for the possibility of friendship, without talking to them first.

Just like you can't judge someone's character from the very first message they send you in online dating.

If she reads my profile and thinks I seem ok and likes the way I look in my profile picture is what's significant, not if I personalize or impersonalize the first message.

Just like approaching a random stranger, you judge them for their appearance and general character/demeanor (how friendly, positive, nice they seem compared to if they may be creepy or aggressive or awkward) rather than if they compliment you instantly or just use a generic greeting/pick-up line.

Truth is, in my epxeriences I've noticed to most people it doesn't actually matter what you say to someone initially, as long as it's not something completely awkward, inappropriate or wrong.

Lol, I remember hearing a story from a friend who literally said 'Hey, she's got a banana in her pocket!' and the girl he said it too literally had a banana in her pocket. They dated for 2 years.

I've noticed myself on dating websites my first message doesn't matter if it's meaningless gibberish, if it comes across as socially acceptable thing to say, it'll get a response. I can literally ask out of the blue 'So, do you read much?' and get something.

I guess some women really do judge men on the first message. Everyone does, actually.

Seems pretty silly to me. I've gotten first messages myself on dating sites from both males and females that are a short, simple greeting and possible 'how are you' and my perception of them remained the same - it was only once i checked their profile picture and profile details my opinion of them was in any way altered.

And, sorry if it seems we're all having a go at you.

I'm just a little skeptical, is all.

I can see the benefits of personalized messages, and like them a little when I get them myself, but that's few and far between.

Majority of the time I feel like the pursuer, even if someone else messaged me first. I'm the one who generally asks the questions, who asks what their hobbies/interests and asks them questions about it, they show no interest in my interests and rarely ask me about it.

I don't know I'd say sending out messages is putting in effort when it comes to dating sites. And it's very possible they are looking at the profiles and only sending messages to women they find appealing rather than just randomly sending them out.

But yeah I have to say during my time on dating sites, messages with no sort of personalization didn't usually strike my interest enough to respond...unless I looked at their profile and something really stuck out as appealing about them. Also with simple unpersonalized messages I also had the issue of simply not even knowing what to say. I mean its a dating site might as well get to the point of what interests you in a person then making small talk when both people know what the site is for.

Not saying its an approach guys should never use, but I'd be another female that sending out a bunch of simplified messages probably would not work on. Of course some females like to be more initiating in relationships so they might prefer guys who use that approach.

^ Ah, yes, that's another reason. The example that got me thinking was a funny question, so that's okay, I'd answer the question I guess. But if it's just a comment or just "hi", I don't know where to go from there, and they have made me do the work. Sure, I could just answer "hi" back, but that would feel rude to me as then I've forced THEM to go to effort to come up with something more to say.

On the occasions when I've given the benefit of the doubt and replied to a low-effort message, and I've put in the effort and asked them a question in my reply so they have something to work with, I've always gotten another dead-end response back again. Making me do all the work just irritates me (and says something about their personality) so I don't keep trying.

Basically, short unhelpful messages tend to be sent to me from people I'm not compatible with, so I've learned that and almost never respond to them now.


Note: This is the email-style messaging I'm talking about, not instant messaging. If you are sending a chat message to someone who is online and intend to talk back and forth in real time, I see no problem with just saying "hey how are you" like you would in real life. It's only a problem with offline messaging, when you might only send a message every day or so, and simple one-liners make the whole process take a very long time.

I haven't done it yet, but it wouldn't really make sense give me to reply in a way that is not personalised in some way.

I'm guessing the profile is like a CV, so perhaps keeping it short but personal is the best way to go for starters.

I was thinking referencing thing in my or their profile. Given I do want them to think about suitability too, whether it resonates.

Can say something along the the lines of "Hi, I'm interested in independent minded women and XYZ on you profile resonated with me..."? Then discuss that?

I've had messages like that before, and will reply (if I'm interested in them). Without a prompting question though it's still making the other person put in the effort to keep the conversation going. Like, I'd be thinking "that's great that it resonated...now what?". So the part where you said you'd discuss it, I'd make that a question, in the same message. Give the other person something to work with.

That's what I'd do anyway.

We I guess that main question would be a genuine one rather rather than a conversation device. I would be interested to know if they saw independence in the same way. Just becuase it resonates doesn't mean either of us know. I'd rather them be frank either way.

Okay, I get what you're saying now.

Yes, it's the dead-end people I always get stuck with. I almost always feel like I'm making a one-sided effort.

Sometimes they'll slightly ask questions back, but I've always felt like a pursuer in online messaging.

Even friends are quite passive communicators and I'm the chattier one who tries to converse with them. It seems that it's not that they don't want to speak with me - they do, they just go about it passively.

So maybe I'm already annoyed I at least make the effort to actually say hello, online or otherwise, it's just extra hardwork to reference their profile in a first message.

Just like it's extra hard work to, in the real-world, approach a high number of women you're attracted to but have to try and think of an effective, 'unique' greeting and one that's relevant to the situation.

For instance it's an effort to think of how to approach a female at a library/bookstore, do you say something related to books? Do you also compliment her on her looks appropriately? How quick do you approach? Or do you just keep it simple and say 'Hi'? Maybe she's carrying about her day and doesn't want to be approached?

And at the beach:

Do I comment on her looks appropriately? Would she feel uncomfortable being approached at the beach because she's in a position where men can see far more of her body? Maybe she just wants to carry about her day and isn't looking to be approached?

All this questioning, on top of also being extremely nervous and trying to overcome your nervousness? Oh, look, she's gone. Better luck next time.

I've outright refrained from sending first messages in online dating because I waste too much time on being stuck on how to start.

Some websites this is fine, but Tinder it's really not, as messaging within the first 12-48 hours is ideal.

Saying 'Hey, How are you?' could have really saved me some more opportunities that have been lost.

I guess what I'm saying is, thinking of personalizing a first message can indeed end up resorting to over-thinking as you may be absolutely stuck on what's the right thing to do or say.

Especially since some messages I did think I put thought into, but after sending them realized they were wrong or inappropriate.

So one has to think long, carefully to craft a personalized message that doesn't cause a negative reaction out of the other person.

All this over-thinking can be solved with simply saying 'Hey, how are you?' and just hoping you get a response.

Dead-enders are the worst, but I can't understand why anyone would see the very first message as a 'dead-end message'.

It's the first message, it's the beginning of the conversation.

If someone says hello to me, I react with a hello and/or how are you back.

Don't feel guilty about this if it puts the effort back on them - you're both going to, or at least should be, starting to put in an equal effort by the 5th message beyond.

If not, it's probably not going to work out.

In real life, men have the undivided attention of the woman. He isn't competing with hundreds of other men that are bombarding her with messages.

^

True that, and that's why online dating is usually horrible for men (But great for women; options = power).

You become an item in a meat market, not a person.

That makes sense. I can't relate because I do message people (only those I am interested in after reading their profile, I don't play the "numbers game"), and I follow the advice that I give others. I don't get inundated with messages so I guess I don't know what it's like to not have to make effort, but I like to think I'm the sort of person who would make effort regardless.


Yeah the "dead-end" thing isn't really what I was talking about in my initial post, it's a lovely extra thing I'm also fussy about that got added into this thread Oh I'm a delight.

I see what you mean, a first message can't possibly be a "dead-end" strictly, but it can in the sense that it can be what I call "unhelpful" to those who may also may be not great at sending messages. If it's just a sentence, like a joke, what does the receiver do with that? A talented conversationalist could probably come up with plenty of things, but for other people (like myself), it would actually take some effort to come up with a reply including something that THEY can also respond to easily (as I like to make the conversation easy for them if I can).

If I get sent "hi, how are you?", apart from the problem I have with that that I described in the original post, it just feels weird to me to reply with simply "great thanks, how are you?" when really I want to actually talk with them about a few things. Days could pass between messages, why are we wasting them on saying essentially nothing? Five message in could be in a week.

Hi yellowtamarin, how are you doing?