?

Log in

Adult Friend Finder - Polyamorous Secular Transhumanist Me [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Wade

[ website | wade ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Links
[Links:| Polyamory Transhumanism ]

Adult Friend Finder [Apr. 15th, 2008|09:13 am]
Wade
In which Wade corrupts the innocent with talk of naughty web personals sites. And asks for some feedback on a profile.

[Warning: Although there aren't any pics strewn about this entry, it is about naughty web personals sites. Work-safe as long as your boss isn't looking over your shoulder.]

[Warning: Being away from LJ for a few months has NOT helped me find brevity.]

Preamble

Last entry, I summarized what's been happening the past few months. This entry will be much more focused on the silliness that is www.adultfriendfinder.com. Of course, given my inability to stay on topic, I'll probably end up exploring a variety of thoughts only peripherally related to smutty web personals sites, but we'll see :-)

I first checked out adultfriendfinder.com (hereafter referred to as AFF) about ten years ago, but lost interest in it quite quickly, because it didn't feel particularly real, and I had the impression that there probably 20 males on the site for every female. Since I can't compete with boys who have 10 inch cocks or who can bench press small Toyotas and/or who are stunningly attractive, it is probably not too surprising that I didn't get any responses to my admittedly somewhat desultory attempts at connection back then.

This second time around, my reasons for joining AFF were more geeky than anything else, which amuses me quite a bit. I have recently been wanting to get back to work on a long-term software project related to the automated downloading, parsing, extracting and instrumentation of web-personal websites. The goal is to provide access to all web-personals sites transparently thru a single web interface. There are all sorts of subtleties associated with this kind of coding, and I decided to do some psychology on myself. By picking a sexually provocative site as my newest "test-bed" for this coding project, I could combine my interest in the project itself with my interest in sexually open people, thus benefiting both interests :-) I'm happy to say that this psychological reasoning has been working quite well as a motivator (although a number of other coding projects are also on the go, so this project has had to share time with them). Along the way, I've also discovered that AFF has improved in some surprising ways, and has some neat features that make it less superficial than one might at first assume. Which isn't to say the site isn't mostly superficial, but then again, most sites are superficial. As long as the site provides some facilities for finding the depth amongst all the shallowness, I can begrudgingly deal with superficiality.

Psychology and AFF

AFF is quite intelligently designed in a variety of ways. For one thing, you cannot (by default) see profiles unless you are a member. Given the sexually provocative nature of the site, I can only assume this is an attempt to protect the privacy of AFF members. If a person finds someone else's picture on the site, they can't just send an email to everyone at work saying "look who's posing nude on AFF!", since there is no publicly accessible URL that one could include in this hypothetical tattle-tale email.

This is presumably the reason why so many people seem surprisingly comfortable posting extremely explicit pictures on the site. Of course, a fair number of the more provocative profiles are fake, but it still leaves a lot of "real" people letting it all hang out. I'm continually fascinated by how split-personality our society is about sex: On the one brain, disconcertingly prudish about sex, and on the other brain rather fascinatingly open about sex.

Unfortunately, one of the problems with a sexually explicit site is that people tend to get tunnel-vision and focus exclusively on the sexual dimension. Hence the superficiality of the site. However, I continue to believe that there are some people on AFF who understand that an exploration of sex is best done within the context of multi-dimensional compatibility. We'll see if my optimism is remotely merited over the next while. So far, it hasn't been :-)

I've been on AFF for a few months, but I've been more geek than perv, spending most of my time writing code that will apply to not just AFF but other web-personals sites as well. However, on two separate occasions I've done a search for nice, attractive, slutty girls in the Bay Area. I'll admit that some of the girls on this list were there because they had provocative pictures, but most of the profiles I found interesting had platonic pics and interesting write-ups. Or so I tell myself :-)

After deleting all the girls in this initial list who were clearly not looking for messages from me (either because my age wasn't in their preferred range, or because I'm a boy and they were looking for girls, etc.) I was left with a short list of possibilities. I sent personalized messages to each person after carefully reading their profiles and commenting on perceived compatibilities, asked for clarifications in areas where I didn't know if my impressions were valid, etc. etc.

As is usually the case on web-personals sites, the number of responses I receive is no where near the number of messages sent. I assume this is purely a function of the profoundly different experiences males and females have when interacting via web-personals sites, I imagine. Sadly, we still have a world where girls are seemingly more comfortable being chased, and boys are required to be initiators or remain celibate (even with all the talk about gender equality that females are prone to demand, without really considering what equality means). This, combined with the gender imbalance online (boys tend to be more geeky than girls, tend to be more willing to spend money on web-personal sites, and especially tend to be more likely to gravitate to sexually provocative sites) means that girls get many more messages than boys do.

Don't get me wrong here. I'm not claiming that girls have it any better than boys on web-personals sites. Just because one receives lots of messages doesn't mean one receives any messages from someone they are remotely interested in. The experiences of males and females online are different, not better or worse. I'm only offering this observation as an explanation for why so few females respond to messages - they are overwhelmed with too many such messages, can afford to pick-and-choose, or have been otherwise conditioned against responding (i.e. when they do respond with disinterest, boys pout, or get nasty, or try to convince the girl she's wrong to dismiss him, etc.)

Whatever the reason, on every single web-personals site I've tried, the number of responses I receive is usually about 1 in 20. AFF was no exception: I have received 2 responses to my AFF message sending sprees. Of course, this isn't about quantity - it only takes one successful connection to make one more optimistic.

One of the responses led to some interesting emails and, a little later, a veritable blizzard of text messages over a two day period, followed by an in-person meeting. However, it ended there (which is completely acceptable - I appreciate the importance of chemistry in such situations, and I obviously wasn't what the girl was looking for). A pity though, as we seemed to share a variety of similar interests, both sexual and non-sexual.

There was less interaction with the other girl who responded. I sent a brief initial messages, she responded with an even briefer message, I responded with a very long message, she responded with a very brief message. I'm pouting and haven't yet responded, but I'll do so sometime soon. It is just frustrating when I make real attempts to explain myself and don't manage to get past the assumptions and generalizations and stereotypes we are all prone to make.

Some Miscellaneous AFF Observations

I recently realized that AFF has added the ability to blog on the site, which is kinda promising. We can expect that many of the blogs will be one-dimensionally sexual (and probably "based on a true story" without being too attached to the real truth), but at the same time I am hoping to find at least a few people who have spent some time providing a more multi-dimensional picture of themselves. I've copied over some of my LJ entries to AFF, and have been writing some additional AFF-focused entries as well. I'll post them here in LJ too, of course.

I'm quite fascinated by the variety and creativity shown by the multitude of web-personals sites. Every site has its novel, interesting, enjoyable quirks, and AFF is no exception. An example of this is what AFF calls "bling". These are small icons (much smaller than LJ icons though - the largest are 40x40, others are 20x20, whereas LJ icons are 100x100) that members can create, give as gifts to others, or acquire from others as gifts or by "buying" (with AFF "points", which you accumulate for various activities, like filling out your profile, creating a blog, etc.) AFF has created this AFF-specific economy to encourage people to develop their profiles, which is a smart idea.

Another psychologically smart feature of "bling" is that you must create the bling yourself. That is, you can't just upload an arbitrary picture, you must "draw" the bling yourself, using a palette-based web-page where you select colors, click on squares representing pixels, draw lines, paint regions, etc. This makes the bling more "personalized", but also means that most of the bling is fairly simplistic and amateurish. Nothing wrong with that though!

Of course, even though I appreciate the reasons why AFF set things up this way, I'm waaaay too lazy/non-artistic to be making my own bling. I am, however, rather good at teh coding. After downloading the AFF web-pages that implement the bling editor, de-obfuscating the javascript code, and identifying the javascript methods necessary to change colors and set pixels, I was set for some AFF hacking. A few hours of coding produced a simple Perl program that takes an arbitrary image, reduces it to 40x40, extracts the color of every pixel, and generates a sequence of javascript function calls that sets 1600 pixels to appropriate colors. Long ago, I hacked up firefox to allow me to do things that firefox doesn't allow me to, and one such thing is to allow me to execute an arbitrary javascript file within the context of an already loaded webpage (allowing me to programmatically emulate the same activities that a more artistically inclined but less technically sophisticated person would perform :-)

The end result of these few hours of hacking was the ability to upload an arbitrary image to AFF, which means that my collection of bling went from 0 to 50 in an hour. And since my bling was blatantly copied from LJ icons and naughty pr0n pics, my collection is much more sophisticated than most, if I do say so myself. It is quite possible that one of your (non-proprietary) LJ icons has made it into AFF bling, since I explored the user icons of my flist to accumulate my initial set of bling.

Ironically enough, after creating all this bling, I haven't actually bothered to use it for its intended purpose of attracting attention. Having proven to myself that AFF's attempts to circumvent me from doing this were for naught, I was content :-) I've been too busy with other things to focus much on AFF, so the bling was been gathering dust. However, it is available for whenever I decide to try round 3 of messaging interesting girls. We'll see if some judiciously gifted bling involving witty sayings or esthetically pleasing imagery will increase my response ratio :-)

My AFF Profile

We all know how impossible it is to summarize ourselves on web-personals sites in a way that accurately communicates to others who we are and what we are looking for. Writing a profile for AFF is no exception, and since most females don't take the site remotely seriously, it is especially difficult to attract the right attention.

In the hopes that my LJ brethren might be able to provide me with some feedback on how to improve on my AFF profile, I've included it here. If you actually take the time to read it, and have any constructive criticism, I'd sincerely love to hear it.

What I'm looking for is quit simple to describe in general: I'm looking for kindred spirits; people who share with me similar philosophies about life, and interpersonal relationships, and sex.

However, the details, as always, are a wee bit more ...involved...

This site is obviously rather focused on sex, which is, in one way, a good thing, because we all like sex. On the other hand, I am really not looking for "just sex". I like liking the people I interact with sexually. I like developing a friendship based on trust and communication and honesty and all that good stuff. I am a multi-dimensional person with many different interests (of which sex is just one) and I very much prefer interacting with others who are interested in things besides just sex. Of course, if you are able to pursue other interests AND sex at the same time, that's completely acceptable :-)

You and I both know how difficult it is to "summarize" ourselves in a few words on profiles like this. My solution is to not bother with a "few words", and instead write lots of them. Unfortunately, if I happen to have caught you in an impatient mood, you are almost certain to just zoom past this profile because it is too much effort to read. I understand that, but if you are looking for an intelligent, creative, honest, sexual, communicative, unusual male, I'd appreciate you spending some time reading more about me so you can decide if we are compatible as friends and/or lovers. In addition to the following ramblings, you can also read more about me in my blog.

AFF tends to focus on the sexual dimension, which is both good and bad. It is good because sex is fun, and I'd like to connect with others who also enjoy sex and have a healthy attitude towards sexuality. However, it can also be problematic because it encourages people to be rather one-dimensional on AFF. Just for the record, I'm not interested in just sex. I like multi-dimensional people with many interests and passions, of which one (of many) is sex. If you feel the same way, I'd love to hear from you. And now that I've made that disclaimer, the rest of this initial profile will be fairly sexual in nature :-)

I am an ethical slut, seeking others who identify as ethical sluts as well. And by ethical I don't mean "boring" or "conservative", I mean honest, authentic, self-aware, responsible, communicative and introspective. Nor does 'slut' refer to some negative puritanical judgement, it refers to people who agree that sex is a wonderfully intense, supremely enjoyable, infinitely variable activity that one or more people can enjoy together to the benefit of ALL involved.

Ethical means that I understand what my partners expectations and interests and boundaries are, and that I take the time to understand these things *before* I start interacting with them sexually. Slutty means that I am quite clear with my partners that I will be seducing them, and that I want to lick them from head to toe with particular attention near the middle, and want to feel and see and experience them under me and above me and beside me in as many ways as we both find compelling.

Ethical means that I want there to be a mutual sense of trust and loyalty and connection between myself and my partners. Slutty means that once trust has been established, it opens up whole new vistas of intensely erotic possibility. If I trust you, I'll let you take me places I haven't been before. If you trust me, you may consider pushing a boundary a little further than you otherwise might have. And there is real erotic potential in pushing boundaries.

Ethical means we do not harm each other, or others, by our sexual activities. Slutty means that if you *like* being spanked (for example), it isn't harm :-). Ethical means that if you don't like being spanked (for example), you communicate that and I respect your boundaries. Slutty means that we identify each others boundaries and at least discuss the potential in deliberately pushing the envelope together, to see what new erotic experiences exists in the unexplored territory near that boundary. There are soft boundaries and there are hard boundaries, and a little bit of discussion can ensure that sex stays hot and intense, not uncomfortable and unpleasant.

Ethical means I want to *care* about the people I interact with, sexually or otherwise. Slutty means that I love sexuality and love girls who love sex. Too often, our society makes sweeping generalizations like "for girls, sex is love, and for boys, sex is sex." I think this cliche does a disservice to both sexes. Part of what makes sex so wonderful is the sense of *connection* one has with a sexual partner. Having myself sheathed in a partner is intense on many levels, from the purely sexual to the purely emotional. I would imagine that having someone entering you is likewise intense on many levels, from the purely sexual to the purely emotional. Being sexual doesn't preclude being connected, and being connected doesn't preclude us being extremely sexual together.

I'm not wired like most people. Just because I love one person romantically and sexually, doesn't mean I can't love another person romantically and sexually. I want to develop friendships with people who feel the same way, who actively *want* to share their lives, their thoughts, and their bodies with whomever they feel connected to. When a person I care about (romantically and sexually) meets someone new, and starts interacting with that person (romantically and sexually), I am sincerely *happy* that my partner is happy. I'm happy for her because I know that her interacting with someone else does not mean that her and I share any less of a connection than we did before, and that we can continue to explore our own relationship for as long as we both enjoy it. Of course, it also helps that I am actively sexually aroused by a partner having sex with other people, but then again, i did mention that I'm not wired like most people, didn't I? :-)

I'm not interested in fucking a stranger. I'm not interested in satisfying my own self-interest at the expense of other people's well being. I AM interested in making connections with kindred spirits; that is, I'm looking for someone who loves sex and who loves love, and who agrees that there are an infinite rainbow of kinds of sex and an equally infinite rainbow of kinds of love. Maybe you and I can find some shades that work for both of us?

The most obvious "problem" with my profile is that it is "too long" for many people to deal with. And I really do understand the psychology behind this. There are so many people on these sites (apparently 23 million+ people on AFF) that filtering is critically important. And I suspect most of us fall into a habit of filtering people quite cavalierly, based on relatively superficial internal "rules" we've made up and believe represent an accurate measure of compatibility. On a site like AFF, in which sexuality is paramount, it only makes sense that people are going to be prioritizing appearance, physique, endowment and other attributes that lend themselves to fast filtering. Reading an absurdly long profile is NOT part of the fast-filtering game, and I even suspect that many people filter profiles with long write-ups for no other reason than because the write-up is long, simply because there is too much effort involved in reading it, especially when one is in a "filtering" mood.

Even more significant, I suspect, is that almost noone takes AFF very seriously. Because it is so hyper-sexual, I imagine almost everyone views it as superficial and shallow. This almost inevitably means that people interpret messages received on the site in a quite limited (sex-only) context. Understandable, but frustrating. I'm really not into the zipless fuck - I like liking the people I interact with intimately.

Anyways, if you have any commentary on any of the ramblings in this entry, I'd love to hear them. And if you happen to be on AFF, let me know and we can friend each other there too!

LinkReply

Comments:
From: iisz
2008-04-15 04:53 pm (UTC)
>>Sadly, we still have a world where girls are seemingly more comfortable being chased, and boys are required to be initiators or remain celibate (even with all the talk about gender equality that females are prone to demand, without really considering what equality means).

They don't think about it or they are faced with years of overt and subtle conditioning that has taught them not to be aggressive? Or often, even just assertive?

>>(boys tend to be more geeky than girls, tend to be more willing to spend money on web-personal sites,

Boys, in general, just have more money to spend on such things.

Yeah, the profile is too long, and not really what happens on that site, which is a shame. I suggest cutting all the paragraphs where you discuss ethical and slut into ONE paragraph. If that piques a girls interest then she can message you.

I was on there briefly, but not anymore.

You are *such* a geek :).
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: metawade
2008-04-15 09:37 pm (UTC)

On 2008-04-15 09:53am, Cherise aggresively asserted:

They don't think about it or they are faced with years of overt and subtle conditioning that has taught them not to be aggressive? Or often, even just assertive?

50-50 both ways, I figure. Sucks to be female, having to put up with males. Sucks to be male, having to put up with females. :-)

As for the "more money" issues, although this is probably true, I'm not convinced that is the only reason more males are expected to pay than females. For some females, there is still a profound sense of entitlement, a deeply ingrained expectation that males are to pay for things, etc. This statement (obviously) does not apply to you or many other females, but it does apply to a disconcertingly large percentage of the girls I seem to encounter.

I obviously have to sit down on write up an LJ entry (or 10) about gender issues, because expressing points without explaining them is a good way to miscommunicate and a terrible way to convey what I really think about the topic...

Thanks for the input on the profile. Maybe I'll experiment with a profile broken into 3 sections, entitled "1 Minute Snapshot", "5 Minute Summary", and "A more accurate understanding". Hopefully I can entice the filterers to read the 1 minute blurb, which will hopefully lead them to read the 5 minute version, then the longer version, then the blog posts, then they send me an email and we meet and live happily ever after in poly bliss ;-)

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: so_mercurial
2008-04-15 06:14 pm (UTC)
my opinion... *thinks* i liked what you chose to share in your profile. my reaction, considering the length, would be to skip over it. honestly. you need to shorten it up, and keep this particular draft for secondary contact.

there are soooooo maaaaaaaany profiles on AFF that people are not going to devote the time to your profile that you hope for. you need to pick a few salient points, and get to the crux of your needs quickly.

oddly enough, when i was on AFF i never posted explicit pictures in my profile. i did, however, have explicit pictures posted on my 'friends only' albums.

as one of those elusive and extremely rare 'looking for men!' profiles, i had TONS of response. i did take the time to respond to everybody, whether it was just a No thank you. or such. i consider it bad manners to ignore queries. if you don't want to be bothered by random strangers, take down your profile. pffft. ;)

M
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: metawade
2008-04-15 09:46 pm (UTC)

I don't expect anyone to read my profile during random explorations of AFF - I completely agree that noone will read such a lengthy profile in that context. But what about if you receive a (short) message from someone on AFF? I'm hoping that in _that_ context, a person will take the time to read my profile. Of course, this depends entirely on how many messages they receive per day, etc. etc., but I would think at least *some* people would make the effort.

I think I'm going to try structuring the profile into 3 increasingly more details sections. An initial blurb for the hyper-impatient, a slightly more detailed blurb once I've lured invited the unspecting victim nice reader to invest in my profile, and a much more detailed (i.e. the above profile) version for those who feel an urge to send me their panties feel there is potential for real compatbility between us. :-)

And HUGE kudos to you for taking the time to respond to messages - as a representative of male-kind, I sincerely thank you. I too feel it is rather rude not to respond, but at the same time I can understand the awkward situation it puts females in. Meh - no good solution.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: rogue_priestess
2008-04-15 08:43 pm (UTC)
every time I read one of your posts, I go "omg, my brain wants to have sex with you!"

intelligence is hot

you don't live anywhere near Vancouver, BC do you?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: metawade
2008-04-15 09:50 pm (UTC)

Angela! Haven't chatted with you in ages, even though I often see you on MSN. How goes things in Vancouver-land?

Alas, I'm living in San Francisco (which really is a wonderful city). If you are ever in the Bay Area, look me up and we'll see whether your body agrees with your brain :-)

Sigh. I need to find some sapiosexually inclined girls here in SF.

Anyways, thanks for the message. I hope you are doing swimmingly!

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: esmereya
2008-04-15 10:39 pm (UTC)
You should visit Vancouver!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: lifeneverboring
2008-04-16 01:45 am (UTC)
If Wade ever makes it to Vancouver, there'll be cat fights going on... LOL

Maria on the Island
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: esmereya
2008-04-16 03:11 am (UTC)
Catfights? Noooooooooo
I like to share! :-)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: esmereya
2008-04-15 11:47 pm (UTC)
I think long profiles are not necessarily bad, if they convey lots of interesting information. This seems rather repetitive, however - I got the ethical slut point at the beginning, and it feels to me as if it's being repeated without actually telling me any more about yourself. I agree that it would be better kept to one paragraph. Then tell me if you like to travel, go out for dinner, what you like to read, or whatever - also once only. This profile actually only tells me who you want to have sex with, and how. I'd want to know about other aspects of you.

But that's my personal preference - and it my not be someone like me you're looking for. I suspect that your aim is to find someone who really enjoys your communication style - in which case "exposing" that in your profile has its benefits.

A bit off topic, but... I wonder if you would have more luck focusing your efforts elsewhere. To have the best chance of meeting someone compatible, I would suggest hanging out in places where compatible people hang out. You may find someone on AFF, but I think there are other places you're more likely to be successful. If you want to do this online, I suggest OK Cupid. But even better - and this has worked so well for me that I have closed down all internet profiles as being simply too inefficient & frustrating - is get out there and spend lots of time with the Burners!! You live in THE hotbed of burner activity. Get off your computer and find it, and meet lots of amazingly cool people :-) It sounds as if you have at lest one contact already. I know another down there - email me if you're interested in contact details.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: lifeneverboring
2008-04-16 01:49 am (UTC)
My comment is similar to esmereya's: there is an awful lot of repetition in your profile. You say the same things three or four different ways. Once would be not only enough but better.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: diachrony
2008-04-16 06:27 am (UTC)
Since you asked ...

The third and fifth paragraph say the same thing with such similar wording that upon my first reading I actually wondered if you'd copied and pasted and forgotten to edit it out.

And yes, you definitely need to condense the "ethical slut" information. While it's interesting content-wise, it is also likely to put off a new person with all the (annoying) repetition of "ethical means..." and "slutty means..." However, I really did like the actual information contained in those paragraphs, so I wouldn't suggest cutting it all out. Just those stylistic bits of redundancy, and condense it somewhat.

And aside from that, I agree with Esmereya that you'd have better luck with this sort of thing on OKCupid, where people do in fact tend to have fairly lengthy and often interesting profiles (mine, however, is brief and contrarian).
(Reply) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2008-05-15 09:35 am (UTC)
I hope you will excuse my anonymity. I don't have a LiveJournal account but have enjoyed your journal semi-regularly for a couple of years.

My experience with online dating sites is somewhat dated and did not extend to 'adult' sites as I was seeking a long-term, monogamous relationship, albeit a sexually rich one. But it seems to me that the various kinds of sites all feature people struggling to communicate what they are seeking in another person by revealing something about themselves. This is difficult at the best of times and is made more so whenever ego and sexual viscerality become part of the equation.

It seems to me, as it does to several people commenting above, that you
might enjoy a better response rate by extending your searching to other kinds of dating sites. If you have the time and inclination, as part of your project it might even be worth experimenting by trying out a similar profile at different sites and comparing the quantity and character of responses. At a predominantly sex-first site (as AFF seems to be for most members), your profile might seem off-putting precisely because of its sex-but-not-only-sex vibe. At a more conventional site, your profile might be off-putting to those seeking a conventional relationship, but it might be very intriguing to those seeking something broader than mere monogamy. These categories are far from distinct, despite the tendency of dating sites to rigorously segregate them. Some social websites that are not dating sites per se might offer sufficient overlap for your purposes, and perhaps it is possible to extend your parsing algorithm to them. I am thinking here especially of Tribe (which was great for alternative community seekers a few years ago), but it sounds like OKCupid also fits the bill.

I agree that your AFF profile seems too long and somewhat repetitious. Beyond this, you do not manage to say very much about yourself, and here I do not refer to the particulars about your employment or place of residence or preferences in or around the bed but to deeper things about who you are beyond your ethical sluttiness. From your LiveJournal posts it seems clear that you prefer some kind of connection to precede and extend beyond sexuality in your relationships, and yet this (what it might entail and how it might work) doesn't come across all that strongly in your AFF profile. You also say remarkably little about what you are looking for in other people.

I do like a long profile, though, because it cannot help but be revelatory of the writer's literacy, intellect, character and personality (including neurotic and healthy aspects). In my online dating days I ruled out potential candidates for having short or badly written profiles. My own profile was longish and revealing. I have to say I really like the idea of dating sites incorporating blogging functions.

I'll comment on one other element in your post. You describe the low response rate to your efforts at contact as if it is a bad thing. It's my view that dating sites are as useful for ruling out incompatibility as they are for helping identify common desires. Perhaps your decision to contact people reflects a sense that compatibility might already exist, and this is the seat of your disappointment. It seems to me, though, that it's just as good a thing to identify people who *don't* fit your criteria (or who find you don't fit theirs) as it is to find people who do. Algorithm or no algorithm, I'm not sure the process can be rationalized all that effectively. I'm married to someone I met online who did not fall within my search criteria and whose profile was off-putting at first read.

As social networking and dating sites come to resemble one another more and more (e.g., AFF with a blog function; Facebook with a "looking for" tab), perhaps it will get easier to integrate searching for compatibility. The biggest problem with dating sites (adult and otherwise) is that they prioritize dating/meeting/mating and reduce every other element of a person's character to background noise when really, most of us are looking for compatibility almost all the time.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2008-09-02 06:21 am (UTC)

Bling

I am interested in the method you used to get photo blink. I see it more and more of it on AFF, but have not found out how to do it

found you accidentally in a web search on the subject.
(Reply) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2008-09-04 02:46 am (UTC)

Re: Bling

oops, that should be photo Bling, not photo Blink
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2009-01-10 05:42 am (UTC)

Re: Bling

I am curious as well care to share your wisdom with the rest of us oh all mighty god of javascript
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2009-01-28 07:14 pm (UTC)

Re: Bling

Come on Wade, help us out with some sweet code!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2009-07-11 10:35 pm (UTC)

Re: Bling

Oddly enough, I wrote a desktop application to do this, it handles multipart bling as well
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2010-01-10 03:28 am (UTC)

bling on aff

Hey there Wade...my spouse and myself are on AFF and thought your profile was great! Hope you find some good friends like we have on the site, we've been on there since 2004 and have met a lot of very cool people :)
Wade...do you think you can help us with creating bling from photos? We've tried and are having problems. Don't know if you have any time but would really appreciate it if you could lend us a hand :)

Good luck with everything,
Hugs,
Antoinette & Emily
(Reply) (Thread)