Man Sues Match.com For Teasing Him With Non-Active Profiles

The Daily News says that one Brooklyn man is fed up with writing emails to potential dates on Match.com and never getting a response. It’s not that he has a “bad personality” — it’s that the profiles are of people who have canceled.

From the Daily News:

On May 30, subscriber “ajsky65″ sent an e-mail to a former female subscriber called “traehi” and was informed that she was online, the lawsuit says.

Over several weeks, “traehi” received 33 e-mails and hundreds of so-called “winks” from subscribers but could not access them, the lawsuit claims.

“Match misleads paying subscribers by charging them for the ability to write e-mails to members who can’t reply to their e-mails or even read them,” the lawsuit charges.

The lawsuit is for $5 million, and the lawyer representing the ignored would-be-lover is hoping to expand it into a class action.

Lawsuit claims that dating website Match.com sticks it to hopeful users [Daily News]

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Applekid ┬──┬ ノ( ゜-゜ノ) says:

    Gosh, I wish I could sue all the women that ignore me. Especially when life tells me they’re online (ie. they’re right in front of me).

    I’d use the winnings and go on a hooker spree for sure.

    • MostlyHarmless says:

      @Applekid: lol.
      But I think the guy is raving about those teaser previews of hot people the sites keep on sending desperate single guys, constantly implying that theres hope that some hot person near where you live who will reply to you, even though you live in a place whose singles scene sucks and all the halfway decent girls are taken, and that theres no chance in hell that a girl like that would look for someone online.

      … not that i know it from experience or anything.

      • Kelly Lum says:

        @MostlyHarmless: Yeah, I have the opposite problem… I live in NYC where the ratio of single women to available men is INSANE. You expect me to believe there is some hot, lonely, modelesque stud out there who isn’t neck deep in desperate Manhattanite vajayjay? Suuuure.

        • hyperblaster says:

          @Kelly Lum: See you have to lower your standards a bit? Why not settle for PhD’s with 6 figure incomes and beefy retirements accounts planning to settle down? (That would describe me perfectly, and what Kelly is looking for would probably explain my lack of success).

        • SpruceStreetPhil - in a new Pine flavor says:

          @Kelly Lum: already packed and getting the first train tomorrow morning….

          wait what are NYC rents??? Ill stick to good ole gun toting Philly.

        • trujunglist says:

          @Kelly Lum:

          Available men or modelesque studs? I just recently got a gym membership…

      • Geblah187 says:

        @MostlyHarmless: I also have no first hand knowledge of this type of thing *cough* *cough*

        It really does more harm than good to your customer base in the long run … once people discover the shill, they are likely to just ragequit your site altogether.

    • Megladon says:

      @Applekid:

      a little 50 hooker gangbang action?

  2. Chmeeee says:

    All humor aside, this is a serious problem with Match (and they’re not the only ones). There’s really no way of knowing how many people are inactive, but I know that my old profile still shows up on their site and is searchable, so people searching have no way of knowing that its essentially a waste of their time contacting certain profiles. It also hides the fact that their male/female ratio is fairly skewed.

  3. Kelly Lum says:

    Oof. I used match.com for about a year and met some of the weirdest crazies I’ve ever met in my life (the crazies on OKCupid were a lot more tolerable.) Never ran into a problem of non-active profiles, though I usually assumed anyone who didn’t write back was simply disinterested. Can you even tell if the account you’re writing to is canceled, and not just someone who decided not to write back?

    • The-Lone-Gunman says:

      @Kelly Lum: When I dropped a site (Match.com), I went into my profile and posted something like “If you are reading this past [date of cancellation] then you now know that [this site] makes available inactive profiles. Make of that what you will.” just prior to turning off my access.

      Hah! I just checked as a lark–Match.com still has it posted and searchable, even though it was cancelled in July of 2005. Even the disclaimer above was still there!

    • Cyberxion101 says:

      @Kelly Lum: I met a crazy on OKCupid that turned me off to dating services for life. However, before that I came to realize that half the people on these sites are inactive, or are just using the free portion of the service to see if it’s worthwhile. OkCupid was better because it was free, but it was essentially Myspace with a very specific purpose.

      By th way, it occured to me why they allow folks to browse inactive profiles. It makes the prospect of paying for an account all the more attractive when it looks like there is a robust community of people from which to find your match. Downright devious, says I.

      • Kelly Lum says:

        @Cyberxion101: IIRC, some dating sites (not sure which) have gotten in trouble for putting up fake profiles to try to lure people into subscribing. Pretty shady.

    • catastrophegirl chooses not to fly says:

      @Kelly Lum: i recently found out that one of the guys i met on okcupid last year was, as a matter of fact, an officially diagnosed crazy. [he also dated a friend of mine and told her about what his therapist said]
      it doesn’t matter what site you are on, people are still going to be people.
      but at least okcupid shows you when a profile has been deactivated, and shows you how long it’s been since someone logged in if they didn’t deactivate it.
      and it’s free!

      • Kelly Lum says:

        @catastrophegirl – house closing june 12th: Yep. I figured if I’m going to have to wade through a deluge of weirdos, I might as well do it for free. I did meet some pretty decent dudes on OKCupid, though. I can’t say the same for match, though I know that could be as much luck as it could be their userbase.

    • 716 says:

      @Kelly Lum: Just tossing this out there, but my girlfriend and I are coming up on our second anniversary, and we met through MySpace. And MySpace is free.

      We weren’t friends-of-friends or anything; I was just browsing profiles like some creepy Internet creep, saw that we had about a billion things in common, and just cold-contacted her. Granted, I had a couple… um, “unusual” MySpace dates before I met her… but I guess my point is that I don’t see how Internet dating sites like Match find subscribers, when you can get the same results from the free social networking sites.

    • katstermonster says:

      @Kelly Lum: I’m 22 and used Match briefly earlier this year…got a really creepy message from a guy who was late 50′s, if I remember correctly. Older than either of my parents, and he had kids older than I am. Creeeeeeee-pay.

      Also, I had a disclaimer at the top of my page that if you winked at me before sending a message, you were automatically getting written off. Amazing, how many winks I still got. Morons.

      • MostlyHarmless says:

        @katstermonster: It might just be me.. but I find the whole winking business slightly disrespectful. The winking at strangers to woo them I mean. Winking to friends to send a message across is a useful tool.

  4. Cant_stop_the_rock says:

    I don’t know much about how Match.com works, so it would help shed some light on the situation if someone explained some things. Is Match.com like other sites where you can join for free, set up a profile and search and all that, but you have to pay to actually communicate with people? So is it possible that this person who the guy was trying to contact had been a paying member, but then reverted back to a “free” membership? How would the plaintiff come to know that she was unable to receive his messages? Could she retrieve the messages if she started paying again? Is the issue here really that Match.com doesn’t tell you if someone is a paying member or not, and/or doesn’t tell you how recently a person logged in?

    • Darrone says:

      @Cant_stop_the_rock: NO, its actually extremely expensive, and tries to get you to pay in month-blocks instead of normal monthly billing.

      IE, someone signed on and created an account 2 years ago, and there picture and profile is there, but they stopped paying or closed there acct. Now, Jim Mchornypants tries to get ahold of them and gets nothing in return

      It seems like a minor inconvenience, but i have friends (sorry, ladies, im engaged) who have said 95% of what they send out is to inactive accounts.

      • theblackdog says:

        @Darrone: If I remember correctly, you can see how long ago a member signed in, so if Mr McHornypants is too busy hitting the send key one handed rather than reading the profile and noting when they last signed in, it’s their own damn fault.

        • Darrone says:

          @theblackdog: Ahh, but there are ways around this. For example, you get emails after your account has closed, saying someone winked at your, or sent you an email. If you open this email, its considered “checking” you account. Trust me, the system is more devious than you think it is.

        • godai says:

          @theblackdog: It says that the receiver was “online” when he sent the message.

    • theblackdog says:

      @Cant_stop_the_rock: You nailed it, you can search, and you can get emails from folks, but you can’t read them or respond to them until you fork over the cash.

  5. oblivious87 says:

    I used the site for like 3 months or something like that. If I remember correctly, after my subscription ran out, I would still get notifications that I had messages, but could only read them if I signed up again.

    I can’t complain because I did actually get a real life date out of the $60 or whatever I paid, it just turns out that I can’t stand to be with someone 24/7 without me wanting to throw myself off a tall building.

    In the end, I just removed my account completely just so I didn’t get the random message from time to time which would tempt me to waste more money especially during those dry spells and there were ALOT considering I just graduated from Georgia Tech and I was one of the 70% who wasn’t female.

  6. davere says:

    I had a similar problem with chemistry.com You can create your profile for free and they give you a couple matches. If you want more you pay. So I did. I was not interested in most matches, but I was in others. I would click that I was interested and the other person NEVER EVER clicked “interested” or “not interested”

    This is because they were presenting me with profiles that people had written a while back but had not paid or had canceled and thus were no longer active people.

    Their terms stated that they offered no refunds, but I called them up, explained my suspicion and they immediately refunded my money.

    • econobiker says:

      @davere: I am surprised that they didn’t have a “last log on date” function or similar. Some of the ~free~ sites even have that though you cannot communicate directly unless you pay up.

      That said some folks on free sites manage(d) to figure out how to let people know their email address via the user name and discreet hints. When profiles contain info such as “I love saying yaahou when I meet a new person.” or “I always say “G!” when i get new mail from someone.” or “You willA knowO howL to contact me.” if the profiles are not read by actual humans but only by programs searching for obvious @gmail.com or @aol.com type phrases.

      I do not have to worry about this issue now as I met my 2nd wife though an online group that shared our hobby. No more singles sites for me (I do occasionally troll local Craiglist singles and freaks to see if I know anyone. And darned if I didn’t find a woman from my wife’s extended social group of friends one time… The wife laughed as the woman was already known for the type of ~relationship~ for which she was advertising.)

      • wvFrugan says:

        @econobiker:
        “I do occasionally troll local Craiglist singles and freaks to see if I know anyone. And darned if I didn’t find a woman from my wife’s extended social group of friends one time… The wife laughed as the woman was already known for the type of ~relationship~ for which she was advertising.)”

        I’ve done that too. I once found one of my former foster kids selling himself as a prostitute. I responed to the ad & he called me, so very sad, he refused my help.

  7. Benny Zhang says:

    You know … right now is a good to turn gay. ;)

    • Kelly Mitchell says:

      @Benny Zhang:

      Maybe it’s just me, but this makes no sense.

    • wvFrugan says:

      @Benny Zhang:
      Is this the matching site that got sued for discriminating against gay folks? What was the outcome of that anyway? As for the advice, it’s too late for me already. Any gay guys here looking for a date?

      • pgh9fan1 says:

        @wvFrugan: It was eHarmony.com that got sued for violating California’s anti-discrimination law. (Their owner is a fundie.) Because of the lawsuit they set up a separate site for “other lifestyles.”

    • theblackdog says:

      @Benny Zhang: As a gay man, I can tell you that being gay does not make it easier to find a date, if anything, it’s harder for the men because we really are only interested in one thing ;-)

    • fairywench says:

      @Benny Zhang: Chastity Bono thinks this is a good time to turn straight.

      Well, isn’t that what she’s doing? Changing from a woman who likes women, into a man who likes women…which most people would consider to be straight.

  8. 44 in a Row says:

    All humor aside, this is a serious problem with Match (and they’re not the only ones). There’s really no way of knowing how many people are inactive, but I know that my old profile still shows up on their site and is searchable, so people searching have no way of knowing that its essentially a waste of their time contacting certain profiles. It also hides the fact that their male/female ratio is fairly skewed.

    Interesting, because I know that a friend of mine (*cough*) was talking to a girl from Match, went on a couple dates, and then she wound up seriously seeing another guy… couple days later, her whole profile was gone from the site. I seems like less a policy problem with Match.com than it is of people not bothering to deal with their profile when they don’t need it anymore.

    • realserendipity says:

      @44 in a Row:
      I met my husband through the site and we both canceled our profiles. I just checked but we are both still gone from the site. You have to cancel your profile though, not just your subscription.

    • KarlB says:

      @44 in a Row:

      I last used Match.com about a year ago. As of then at least, I found them reasonably honest, with one caveat. The problem with inactive profiles is with people who leave Match by simply leaving — they stop logging in to the web site and stop paying for the service. Match keeps those profiles visible and searchable. If you take the time to “hide” your profile when you leave, this doesn’t happen.

      But Match tells you (roughly) how recently a person has logged in to the site, via a note on their profile page like “Active within 24 hours”, “Active within two weeks” etc. The maximum they report is “Active in more than three months” — when you see that, you can assume it means “hasn’t logged in for the past five years, but never turned off his/her profile.”

      AFAIK, these inactive members should still be getting email notifications every time someone sends them a message or “wink” (blegh) on Match, but they could be filtering out these emails, or may have trashed the email account, etc.

  9. hyperblaster says:

    This is the exact reason I canceled my account on eHarmony. I wrote dozens of emails, and got very few responses. And no, I have no reason to be so self-hating that I would expect such a low reply rate if the intended recipients were actually getting to read the mails I was sending. Needless to say, I cancelled after 3 months. Especially after they no longer had phone support.

  10. Smashville says:

    eHarmony is the one that’s really bad about this. You get matched with paying subscribers, non-paying subscribers, people who have never bothered to check their accounts, etc…you get a nice feeling of rejection, but when you look at the “Who’s Viewed Me” button…and only about 2 people in two weeks click your profile…it means you are being matched to a bunch of inactive members.

  11. dow24 says:

    Once he gets that $5 million, he won’t even need Match.com to get a date! At least until the money runs out.

  12. thewriteguy says:

    Doesn’t Ticketmaster own Match.com? There’s the answer, folks.

    • HRGirl wants a cookie says:

      @thewriteguy: Ticketmaster doesn’t own Match, they’re both under the IAC/InterActiveCorp umbrella. The same people who bring you Citysearch (d-rate Yelp), Shoebuy.com (d-rate Zappos), Vimeo (d-rate YouTube), and Ask.com (d-rate Google). See folks, your astronomical Ticketmaster service fees aren’t just for kicks, they’re keeping afloat dozens of sub-par businesses!

  13. Anonymous says:

    This is the EXACT same thing they do to me! They have sent me notifications that “so n so” has written me, and when I pay to get back on I find that they are referring to an email so-n-so wrote me months before and that so-n-so hasnt been active for weeks. They pull the same stuff over and over, and (on a bad note) out of desperation I repeatedly fall for it. This last time I asked them never to contact me again, which I got an email claiming they will honor it.

  14. 44 in a Row says:

    I am surprised that they didn’t have a “last log on date” function or similar. Some of the ~free~ sites even have that though you cannot communicate directly unless you pay up.

    Every profile I’ve looked at has at least a rough estimate of when the last logon was. The weird thing from the article is that allegedly some of the profiles said “online now”.

    • JaideepG2002 says:

      @44 in a Row: If they were online is the case then they are just fake profiles. Could Match.com be putting out fake profiles to lure people into signing up for their service? And then those profiles don’t have anyone on the other side?

  15. FooSchnickens - Full of SCAR says:

    “it’s that the profiles are of people who have canceled.”

    That should tell him something….

  16. 44 in a Row says:

    If they were online is the case then they are just fake profiles. Could Match.com be putting out fake profiles to lure people into signing up for their service? And then those profiles don’t have anyone on the other side?

    It’s possible… I don’t know, though, I’m just kind of skeptical. It’d be one thing if the guy in question was from out in the boondocks, but there are a ton of people in New York on that site. My friend (*cough*) joined at the suggestion of several other friends, all of whom used and enjoyed it, and my friend has corresponded with several people and been on a few dates so far. It just seems unlikely to me the complete lack of response is due to shenanigans on Match.com’s part.

  17. jdmba says:

    I guess MdC was a lot more friendly 12 years ago when I was on it. I am actually shocked to read how much they are charging (it was free back then, and free for life to those early adopters).

    Back in that day (free for life) one would NEVER delete their profile. I was seriously dating someone at the time and just left my MdC account alone. My now-wife had noted that I never contacted her despite us being a ‘match’ and she had stewed over this fact; so when my other relationship ended and I went back to MdC to see what’s what, I noticed her as a match and contacted her. She was pre-intrigued at the guy who had blown her off for a year so we went out. Been married 9 years.

  18. Mr_Human says:

    Like others pointed it out, it’s not enough to cancel am membership on these sites. You have to disable your profile from being searchable or delete the profile altogether. Otherwise, it goes into “free” mode.

  19. mmcnary says:

    awesome

  20. wyleeguy says:

    EHarm does this same crap. Except I think their worse because they don’t let you browse or search, you are dependent on their trickle of profiles they let you view.

  21. thej27 says:

    True.com is probably the worst site that does this. I tried it for a month. All the time I would get winks and emails from alot of women. When I would check the “Who’s Viewed Me” none of them ever had. I tried EHarmony for free. I started noticing that all my matches had 5 rotating “about me”s that were the same. My favorite always began with “I find humor in everyday situations”.

    • kjm0606 says:

      @thej27: Um, because those are eharmony questions that have a fixed set of answers (based on the questionnaire you fill out). It’s not free-form text.

  22. strathmeyer says:

    Uh, doesn’t every pay dating site do this??? I always assumed this was how they competed against the much better free ones.

  23. 44 in a Row says:

    I started noticing that all my matches had 5 rotating “about me”s that were the same. My favorite always began with “I find humor in everyday situations”.

    In fairness, every woman on every online dating site in the world is sarcastic, enjoys going out on the town but doesn’t mind spending a night in her PJs on the couch with a bottle of wine, and loves to travel.

  24. sharki3232 says:

    This has been my experience with several dating web sites. You sign up for free, get a whole bunch of come-ons from people, get a paid account so you can contact them and suddenly all the come-ons stop. Classic bait and switch. I wouldn’t trust any of these.

  25. There's room to move as a fry cook says:

    Good lord, Match and eHarmony are populated with lonely Consumerist posters. There should be a checkbox for that when you sign up.

  26. italianscallion33 says:

    I’ve used match and eharmony and they both suck that way. There’s no way of knowing (as far as I could tell) who was a paid member and who wasn’t. It was a waste of time emailing around because 90% of the people you emailed probably didn’t have a paid account and couldn’t read your email. And, since I only subscribed to one of them for a short time, I know the frustration of the other end too. Why should I pay so much money to read one email that MIGHT be from a person worth knowing?

  27. theblackdog says:

    I tried out Match.com and actually did go on a few dates, plus I did end up in a relationship with someone for a few months.

    What confuses me about this story is that I could have sworn that Match does actually show the last time someone was signed into their profiles. It was usually general like “Yesterday” “3 days ago” “1 week ago” “Over 2 weeks ago (I think that was the upper limit)” So I feel this was a case that he was not paying attention.

    • econobiker says:

      @theblackdog: Some sites had the actual last log on date- ie: “Last log on August 13, 2005 at 8:42pm.” would pretty much tell you that the person doesn’t visit in 2009.

  28. Righteous says:

    Somebody beat this guy over the head with a Comfort Wipe.

  29. Nytmare says:

    What does “canceled” mean anyway? I have a profile there but haven’t sent them any money yet. Just because you’re not paying them money doesn’t mean you can’t still be (partially) active on the site.

  30. Wendy Sloan says:

    Class action lawsuit? I’m down. Not for a couple of free months of match.com tho :P

  31. Gokuhouse says:

    Is this a good reason for suing them for 5 million? No. Is it a good reason for getting a refund? Yes.

  32. SeanMacATL says:

    It’s no big secret that “profiles” are created and bought for fractions of a penny. You don’t really think these sites launch with thousands of members, do you?

  33. MightyCow says:

    I know for a fact that many profiles of women on dating sites are actually just porn and escort fishing for emails.

  34. Kickstartheart says:

    I used to use Match, and had some luck with it, though nothing long term occurred from the stint. I was supposed to receive six months free, as per their advertisements. I met the requirements, but was automatically debited for another six months at the standard rate. I disputed it, and they refunded the amount. They also claimed to have credited my account with the six months. However, upon attempting to log in, they had completely booted me from the system.

    Some research quickly revealed that Match does this very commonly. Tsk tsk.

    After some brief tinkering on OKC, I found a sweetheart I’ve been with for seven months now.

  35. Loren Fisher says:

    This lawsuit is completely frivolous. Nowhere does Match.com advertise that the free users of its service can read or respond to emails / winks. They do, however, advertise that free users can “LOOK”.

  36. Sys Admn says:

    Same scam as the reunion sites – I’ve get emails every three months from someone allegedly in my high school graduating class. They don’t bother to fill in their profile, they’re not in my yearbook, and they all use the exact same message. I changed my public profile to include “Don’t bother paying for the deluxe membership”. One classmate changed his “dislikes” to “paying membership fees to scam sites like this”.

    • econobiker says:

      @Sys Admn: Story is that Facebook/MySpace social networks etc have sunk the reunion sites’ business plan…

      That said I really don’t give a darn about most HS classmates anymore…

  37. ninevolt says:

    I watched my best friend reenter the dating scene via Match.com, eharmony, and Yahoo Personals….

    In the midst of all those crazies, he did manage to find his current wife– but the *crazies*, oh my word. He actually had me check his house while he was out of town on a business trip– one of the girls tried to break in to “leave him a surprise.”

  38. sibelius says:

    Sue them. But DO NOT turn this into a class action lawsuit. The ONLY people who win in a class action is the lawyers. Of course the lawyer wants to turn it into a class action lawsuit.

    As it stands, a 5 million lawsuit would give the lawyer about 3m and the plaintiff about 1.7m (with the rest floating off to misc fees).

    With a class action lawsuit they can sue for, say, 100 million… the lawyer then gets about 70m of that, the original plaintiff will get about a mill (maybe more if the press gets too nosy), and about 20m of the remainder is eaten up in misc costs to not only promote the class action (get mailing lists, eMail people, snail mail people, posters, radio and television ads, etc), but it is also used for things like letters, checks and postage to the plaintiffs should the class action win).

    So, the result of a class action lawsuit is that the lawyer makes off with 140 million dollars, while each individual person named in the class action gets only about a buck in the mail, in the form of a check. Give me a break!! They spent more than a buck sending all that pre- and post-lawsuit material to get you to sign up for the suit.

    The best thing you can do: NEVER get involved in a class action lawsuit!!! You will ONLY be making the lawyers richer!!! When you get involved in a class action lawsuit you are signing a piece of paper — basically you’re signing away your RIGHTS to sue the company in question… for what will amount to a few pennies in your pocket once the lawyer is done. If you REALLY have a legal case, don’t class action it — do it individually (you stand to get more of what you deserve).

    Of course, in this example I think everyone should be put in jail. Why? A 5 million dollar lawsuit because Match.com lied about girls wanting to chat with some dude? Match.com should come clean, and be held liable — but that guy (and his snotty lawyer) should be sued for attempted rape. Seriously — 5 million dollars? I don’t care how big or corrupt the corporation is, a lack of eMails is not worth 5 million dollars. Just because they’re corrupt doesn’t mean we should be as well.

  39. fuzzymuffins says:

    my experience w/ dating sites: either things happen quickly/consistently or not at all. but i have also found that dating services are FAR LESS ‘productive’ than they were in good ol web 1.0 days…

    6 years ago i joined the dating service affiliated w/ nerve.com. in 6 months i had a dozen dates w/ some great artsy NYC ladies… and made some good friends along the way. i could barely keep track of all the women i was in contact with.

    things fell out of a 5 year relationship last summer so i went back… it sucked. hard. 3 months i hung in. it was a dating black hole and the profiles were creepy. not even one correspondence! i left. i was not going to stick around to pay for more silence.

    ironically for this article i went on match.com back in nov. i made two contacts almost immediately, found a great girl (it’s been an awesome 7 months so far) and we both kicked our subscriptions.

    guys: REMEMBER women will ALWAYS get far more inquiries than men… nice guys have to compete with a plethora of “hook up for sex trolls”, so women have to spend a fair amount of time weeding out the trash.

    advice: don’t expect miracles from online dating. if the service sucks after a month or two, it’s going to continue to suck after a year, so why keep paying. if you don’t find it working quickly, go on to someplace else.

  40. johnfrombrooklyn says:

    Stalking is free!

  41. GreatWhiteNorth says:

    I want to use the site (any site for that matter) but my wife will not let me.

    • econobiker says:

      @GreatWhiteNorth: If , after consumating a marriage act, you think listening to one woman talk in bed is difficult, then a freaky swinging lifestyle may not be for you…

  42. Brian James Schend says:

    Wasn’t match.com the one that guaranteed you would be contacted, so they hired women to send fake messages so they wouldn’t have to pay out?

  43. DoctorMD says:

    JDate does this. But at least they do inform you that the person has not logged in for over 60 days

  44. HogwartsAlum says:

    Ha! People kept telling me to go to match.com so now I have something to email them and say “See? I knew it would suck.” Anyway, I can’t afford that stuff.

    Someone standing next to me, as I was reading this article, saw it and recommended OKCupid. I might try it. But as fuzzymuffins points out above, if it sucks after a month or two, I’m ditching because it will probably continue to suck.

    Or I could just go downtown and sit in the coffeehouse and read a book with an intriguing title and see what happens. ;)

  45. RobertBaron says:

    Based on the info, that’s pretty much par for the internet dating course. Traehi probably has to pay to actually read the msg and respond. And that’s only 1 chick on the site.

    Did ajsky55 even bother to email other people? Or did he simply send one freaking message to one person?

    Internet dating is a pure numbers game. You basically have to send out a huge volume of messages and hope you get some hits back. The attractive women on these sites get bombarded by hundreds of messages a day.

  46. jcargill says:

    They have to keep the female profiles up months or years after they quit (just as a couple of female posters here said they found their profiles from 2005 still up).

    They do this simply to make men believe the m/f ratio is equal or in their favor.

    Sorry, but the best way to meet remains to be f2f. Match et al are wastes of time and money.

  47. Anonymous says:

    A girl who was a FWB for 8 years broke all ties off with me cause she said she wanted to stop cheating on her boyfriend. OK, a week later I get on Match and see her profile as being active a week ago. I was livid cause if she really did have a boyfriend, she wouldn’t be on Match. I called her out on it and she told me that she hasn’t been on Match in over a year. I didn’t believe her and said some nasty things to her. So bad that she really will not ever speak to me again. Turns out she wasn’t lying. Damn you Match.com!!!

  48. riverstyxxx says:

    “Winks” from some dating site? Dude, get a life and meet people in the real world if you want any action.