Purchase thy enemy.

February 2, 2011 9:46 AM

This morning, Match.Com and OKCupid tied the knot, after Match paid OKCupid $50 million in cash. OKCupid have been longstanding and outspoken critics of Match and eHarmony's business models, going as far as to call both sites deceptive scams on their corporate blog. Naturally, those criticisms silently disappeared from OKCupid's blog within minutes of the acquisition being announced.
posted by schmod (147 comments total)

:[
posted by sonic meat machine at 9:48 AM on February 2, 2011

Wait, what? No. This is shitty. No.
posted by aaronbeekay at 9:50 AM on February 2, 2011 [30 favorites]

Whoa. I guess that makes sense... match was looking for a free entity to add to its portfolio, as their attempts to launch one kinda fizzled.

... and good for the OKCupid guys! Getting paid!
posted by ph00dz at 9:50 AM on February 2, 2011

I've almost always had a neglected profile on OKC, and this seems like sad news to me. They really did do things better for free than their fee based competitors.
posted by codacorolla at 9:51 AM on February 2, 2011

Weeeeelp, guess I'll be deleting that unused OKCupid profile I'd been sort of on the fence about whether maybe it would be worth filling out.

It was probably a terrible idea anyway, right?
posted by brennen at 9:51 AM on February 2, 2011

Basically generating hundreds (thousands?) of new potential matches, just in time for Valentine's Day.
posted by bayani at 9:52 AM on February 2, 2011

.
posted by burnmp3s at 9:52 AM on February 2, 2011

Odds that you're flirting into the void: 93%
How does that compare to real life?
posted by Obscure Reference at 9:52 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

Putting the two sites' compatibility scores at around 1%... a relationship doomed to fail
posted by MangyCarface at 9:53 AM on February 2, 2011 [15 favorites]

Boo.
posted by empath at 9:55 AM on February 2, 2011

This is too bad. I've been a fan of the OkCupid team since they were SparkMatch and prior to that The Spark. Maybe they'll take the cash and do something else interesting.
posted by Roman Graves at 9:57 AM on February 2, 2011 [6 favorites]

Strangely, $50 million sounds low for all that data that OKCupid must have on their servers. Judging from the cool things OKCupid writes (sorry, wrote) on their blog, it seems like they already have a good grasp on cool ways to manipulate data. I bet that it's a cool place to work.

Also, neither service ever worked for me, so there is still a one-person niche available for some enterprising dating startup!
posted by antonymous at 9:58 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

I'd be curious to see if this benefits anybody. I can't find anywhere if there's a breakdown of how many users use exclusively one service over the other. The two or three people I know who are confident enough to admit they use online dating have pushed themselves onto several sites, not just one.

Not that it's a bad thing, it's just... you know?
posted by Bathtub Bobsled at 9:58 AM on February 2, 2011

Strangely, $50 million sounds low for all that data that OKCupid must have on their servers.

That's what I was getting at. How much of that data is already on theirs? Maybe it's the redundancies that dropped the price.
posted by Bathtub Bobsled at 10:00 AM on February 2, 2011

Oh please no.
posted by zeek321 at 10:01 AM on February 2, 2011

OkCupid was just fine on its own! This is why we can't have nice things!
posted by so_gracefully at 10:02 AM on February 2, 2011 [8 favorites]

I am almost irrationally excited by the future lack of OkTrends infographic SEO's.
posted by cavalier at 10:03 AM on February 2, 2011 [9 favorites]

But, yeah, bummer for their users, I imagine.
posted by cavalier at 10:04 AM on February 2, 2011

Does this mean no more links to OkCupid blog posts for us to bitch about?
posted by charred husk at 10:06 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

bayani: Basically generating hundreds (thousands?) of new potential matches, just in time for Valentine's Day.

I was wondering about this - will the sites tap into each-others pool of users? And if you find someone on Match.com as an OKCupid user, do you have to pay to send a message? What if you're sending your message into the void, off to someone who no longer uses Match.com?

OKCupid have been longstanding and outspoken critics of Match and eHarmony's business models

Why You Should Never Pay For Online Dating
April 7th, 2010 by Christian Rudder

Today I'd like to show why the practice of paying for dates on sites like Match.com and eHarmony is fundamentally broken, and broken in ways that most people don't realize.
...
It turns out you are 12.4 times more likely to get married this year if you don't subscribe to Match.com.

Bazinga!
posted by filthy light thief at 10:06 AM on February 2, 2011 [3 favorites]

.
posted by andreaazure at 10:07 AM on February 2, 2011

Two feelings:

1) thank god I don't have to see anymore god damn OKTrends posts on MeFI, which I always suspected were an inside job

2) 50 million? Someone got robbed. What is this, 1973?
posted by spicynuts at 10:08 AM on February 2, 2011 [5 favorites]

Nothing smooths over difference than lots and lots of cash.
posted by tommasz at 10:09 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Horrible news. I've never used Match (the pay model always seemed awful to me, especially when OKCupid was so great), but from what I gather the two sites' personalities and userbases seem to have little in common with each other. Like if MetaFilter was bought out by Fark or something.
posted by naju at 10:09 AM on February 2, 2011 [5 favorites]

$50 million does seem low to me, but if the OK Cupid team gets to take over (ala Disney's Pixar buyout) it could potentially be much, much more lucrative. OK Cupid's affinity for data will enable them, with the proper resources, to monetize relationships in ways unimagined.
posted by polyhedron at 10:10 AM on February 2, 2011

I'm assuming that there was overlap between the memberships of the sites anyway (& also lots of lapsed members on both). OK Cupid is free, so if you were joining Match, why not spend an extra 30 mins joining another one as well?
posted by DanCall at 10:10 AM on February 2, 2011

I met my husband through Match. Online dating works for some people. If two companies get together and make it easier for people to find each other, that has to be a good thing.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:11 AM on February 2, 2011

Even though there are plenty of OKC people already assuming everyone will have to pay now, the Match people probably know that it would be a terrible business decision to do so, considering the level of competition in the industry.

Most likely the most significant changes will be prominent banner ads for Match and adjusting the A-list services so they don't compete as much with Match's. OKC will still be free, just watered-down.
posted by Schwartz_User at 10:12 AM on February 2, 2011

There used to be a link on OKcupid that said "If you have an STD, click here", and it would send you to match.com.
posted by empath at 10:13 AM on February 2, 2011 [53 favorites]

Nothing smooths over difference than lots and lots of cash.

"I like money."

--Frito Pendejo
posted by ignignokt at 10:13 AM on February 2, 2011

Pimpin' ain't easy.
posted by hal_c_on at 10:13 AM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

Well, I'm glad I met my fiancee on OKCupid before they got acquired by Match.
posted by pombe at 10:13 AM on February 2, 2011 [7 favorites]

polyhedron: "OK Cupid's affinity for data will enable them, with the proper resources, to monetize relationships in ways unimagined."

Ah, nothing gives me a warm fuzzy feeling like monetizing relationships.
posted by mullingitover at 10:15 AM on February 2, 2011 [6 favorites]

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo :(
posted by rosa at 10:16 AM on February 2, 2011

This issue is…

O Irrelevant
O A little important
O Somewhat important
O Very important
O Critical
posted by Flashman at 10:19 AM on February 2, 2011 [63 favorites]

After reading the PR and the awful corporate-speak, I felt bad. Unfortunately I haven't met my future significant other on OKC yet so I better hurry up! I've already tried Match and Eharmony. I'm running out of options.

(no, the real world isn't really an option unless the girl wants to break the ice; painfully shy, etc)
posted by SirOmega at 10:20 AM on February 2, 2011

I used OKC a bit for casual dating, but I met my wife on Match.com. I wonder how many other people have had similar experiences?

There is clearly room on the web for both Match and OKC to coexist, make money, and I'll be surprised if IAC forces any change on the OKC business model or internal operating structure.
posted by ben242 at 10:30 AM on February 2, 2011

This affects me personally far less than I would like.
posted by kenko at 10:31 AM on February 2, 2011 [3 favorites]

Wow, lame.
posted by l33tpolicywonk at 10:32 AM on February 2, 2011

Mathowie, now's your chance! The field's wide open for MetaLove. $5 lifetime membership fee is pennies compared to $34.99 a month, and as a bonus, people will be able to step right over to AskMe when they fall out of MetaLove.

Can we call it "the pink"?

I just disgusted myself.
posted by quiet coyote at 10:34 AM on February 2, 2011 [116 favorites]

Boy, first eMusic, now OKCupid. I guess I'll have to start torrenting my dates too.
posted by mykescipark at 10:34 AM on February 2, 2011 [18 favorites]

On the one hand, this seems bad just in the general sense that having more differing sites is probably good, given the variety of approaches.

On the other hand, I've had far more luck on Match/Chemistry than OKCupid, so meh.
posted by wildcrdj at 10:35 AM on February 2, 2011

'nother one down the shitter.
posted by aerotive at 10:35 AM on February 2, 2011

pombe: "Well, I'm glad I met my fiancee on OKCupid before they got acquired by Match."

Same here!
posted by Chrysostom at 10:36 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

SirOmega: "After reading the PR and the awful corporate-speak, I felt bad. Unfortunately I haven't met my future significant other on OKC yet so I better hurry up! I've already tried Match and Eharmony. I'm running out of options.

(no, the real world isn't really an option unless the girl wants to break the ice; painfully shy, etc"

Eponysterical?

Bravely ran away... Brave brave brave brave SirOmega... ;)
posted by symbioid at 10:38 AM on February 2, 2011

I met my fiancee on OKC, 98% match based on the silly questionnaires. I'm curious about what will actually happen after the merge. Combined search results with some being paid?

"To message Alexandria, you need to sign up for the premium service." seems most likely.

Or will they simply kill the really good, free OKC and force everyone to pay?
posted by Invoke at 10:41 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

I've always liked OKCupid (it's how I met my wife), and I don't really know anything about Match.com—can someone outline for me what's going to change for OKCupid users?
posted by Zozo at 10:42 AM on February 2, 2011

This sucks. Why wasn't I consulted?
posted by The Lurkers Support Me in Email at 10:45 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

This is really cool, because it means OKC will start to suck, re-opening the online dating arena for actual competition. IT'S WIN-WIN.
posted by Afroblanco at 10:48 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Sarcasm aside, MetaLove isn't a bad idea at all. (Um, the website. Not love-about-love or something.)
posted by andreaazure at 10:53 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

quiet coyote: "Mathowie, now's your chance! The field's wide open for MetaLove."

I.... kinda want this.
posted by yeolcoatl at 10:54 AM on February 2, 2011 [10 favorites]

Well, it's not like it's a big surprise - OK Cupid, which grew out of SparkMatch, which grew out of TheSpark.com, which grew out of SparkNotes, is the brainchild (along with the rest) of one Christian Rudder, who seems to be very, very good at making cool web things and then selling them for a lot of money without a whole lot of teeth-gnashing or soul-searching, just a bunch of dollars and time to devote to new projects. He makes pretty fun music, too. He's awesome, and also, I hate him.
posted by peachfuzz at 10:54 AM on February 2, 2011 [6 favorites]

> re-opening the online dating arena for actual competition

plentyofcraigslist
posted by jfuller at 10:54 AM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

Guess I won't be doing any more online dating (1 date from OKC, and she messaged me). Oh well, I'm sure I can learn how to meet people in meatspace (as long as I don't call it meatspace).
posted by Eideteker at 10:55 AM on February 2, 2011

What has changed?
(reposted from my MeFi project comment thread)

Honestly, from here it looks like OK Cupid is willing to believe anything they think will bring them more money. I wonder if they still have that link in their opening survey where if you answer "yes" to the question "Do you have an STD" you are sent to match.com? Unlikely, I know.

In any case, I'm not trying to be all schadenfreude-tastic here, just pointing out that maybe OK Cupid's integrity as an unbiased purveyor of information should be doubted.
posted by metameat at 10:55 AM on February 2, 2011

LoveMetafilter (LoveMe) is clearly the superior site name. DateMe would also work.
posted by Copronymus at 10:56 AM on February 2, 2011 [14 favorites]

This user profile popped up on Reddit the other day. It's now all I can think about when OKCupid is mentioned.
posted by Scoop at 10:57 AM on February 2, 2011 [15 favorites]

The financial component could be responsible for some differences in how people use the site. To the extent that someone is more invested in really finding a significant other, they're probably more likely to put a little bit of cash behind that. If it's a free service, you're going to get people who are just checking it out, vaguely interested, and really interested all together. I do like how a free service means more useful data, as far as overall interest in people goes.

I met my husband of 4 years on match.com, so I obviously didn't have a problem with spending a wee bit of money. (Yup, I'm the one that put down the cash on that bet).
posted by bizzyb at 10:58 AM on February 2, 2011

Dickwads.
posted by lalochezia at 11:00 AM on February 2, 2011

Wait, wait.

The guy who founded OK Cupid is in Bishop Allen?

This is stunning. I really don't know what to make of that. (Things are what you make of them, you may have heard.) I mean, I'm not an ambitious or particularly competitive person, but jesus.
posted by kenko at 11:03 AM on February 2, 2011

I met my wife on OKCupid, but the one thing I'll really really miss about the site is being a flagmod. After a while, I was more interested in doing that than trying to meet people.
posted by LionIndex at 11:07 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Oh well, I'm sure I can learn how to meet people in meatspace (as long as I don't call it meatspace).

Just call it "meetspace" and they'll be none the wiser.
posted by NMcCoy at 11:09 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Please make MetaLove. The April 1st launch date is approaching!
posted by zippy at 11:09 AM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

kenko: I know. He writes and sings and plays the ukelele and guitar. It's infuriating.
posted by peachfuzz at 11:10 AM on February 2, 2011

This brings back memories of being really confused when I went back to TheSpark.com to look for their purity tests again and instead found a study guide site. I was like... WTF?
posted by kmz at 11:11 AM on February 2, 2011 [3 favorites]

(Also, there should be much confused discussion on MetaLove between singles and Anthrax fans)
posted by zippy at 11:13 AM on February 2, 2011 [7 favorites]

I met my wife on match.com. I was an early user of match.com who was grandfathered into a free account. She was still on her 30-day trial. It was free for us!
posted by Zed at 11:20 AM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

It's interesting how much visceral UGH this is invoking in people. Much more than similar mergers, it seems. OKC seems to be generally really well liked, which is interesting given how much people bitch about the blog posts. If OKC becomes a pay site, I expect that we'll see even more of the free dating service niche being taken up by facebook.
posted by stoneweaver at 11:21 AM on February 2, 2011

I met my wife through OKCupid, and I particularly enjoyed the OKTrends blog. I am saddened by this news.
posted by jsnlxndrlv at 11:21 AM on February 2, 2011

Sad. I met my girlfriend through that site - she was a friend of a girl I met on there. Heh.
posted by Threeway Handshake at 11:22 AM on February 2, 2011

I guess I'll have to start torrenting my dates too.

Just stream them (NSFW!!) like the rest of us.
posted by LordSludge at 11:28 AM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

Fifty million sounds kind of low. I am guessing Match was interested more in the talent than the product, and hoping that the people who built OKCupid are getting really fat retention packages. They deserve to vest in piece by now if they want.
posted by Dr. Curare at 11:32 AM on February 2, 2011

AdultFriendFinder must be looking to be taken over and completely dominated.
posted by benzenedream at 11:34 AM on February 2, 2011 [8 favorites]

I also met my girlfriend through OKCupid, its an awesome site with lots of hilarious members. Sad about the takeover. Kinda glad the people behind OkC are getting some rewards though - they really understood how to build a cool site.
posted by memebake at 11:36 AM on February 2, 2011

Copronymus: "LoveMetafilter (LoveMe) is clearly the superior site name. DateMe would also work."

This... is not a terrible idea.
posted by danny the boy at 11:42 AM on February 2, 2011

Dammit. I was thinking like a month or so ago, "Man, I should totally cancel my Comcast premium channel cable package and just get Netflix streaming"... then it comes out in a FPP that their service will likely diminish severely when contracts are renegotiated and they can't let you basically have a huge library on demand for $10/mo.

Then I was thinking "Man, I should totally sign up for OKCupid- it's free, it apparently works fairly well, and who knows, I might finally meet that special someone to tame the beastly hincandenza?".... argh!

Hey AskMeBlue: are Netflix and OKCupid even going to be worth signing up for at this point?
posted by hincandenza at 11:45 AM on February 2, 2011

are Netflix and OKCupid even going to be worth signing up for at this point?

If it sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't. And if it really IS, it won't last, so either enjoy it while you can or don't bother.

But then, who needs online-dating? (The timing of this ASPCA campaign is quite fortuitous)
posted by oneswellfoop at 11:54 AM on February 2, 2011

Metafilter as a dating site? You've got to be kidding.

I can just see it - snarky comments everywhere, people bringing up your posting history ("your profile says that you like long walks on the beach, but 3 of your ask.metafilter questions are driving related..."), people "fixing" profiles for you...

Let's *not* do this.
posted by jasper411 at 11:55 AM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

Matt: If you are going the LoveMe route, then please also consider the folks who are just interested in casual encounters. DoMe.
posted by special-k at 11:57 AM on February 2, 2011 [17 favorites]

And post-apocalyptic encounters: ThunderDoMe.
posted by emelenjr at 12:07 PM on February 2, 2011 [33 favorites]

Also, nerd.thunderdo.me
posted by special-k at 12:10 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

(by Simon Rich)

Match.com profile
-----------------

NAME: Count Dracula

OCCUPATION: Aristocrat

LOCATION: Castle Gothica, Transylvania

ABOUT YOU: I am normal human looking for human woman to come to castle. I am normal, regular human. I like the popular music and television. You come to castle.

WHAT COLOR BEST DESCRIBED YOUR HAIR?
Black.

WHAT BEST DESCRIBES YOUR EYE COLOR?
Red.

WHAT IS YOUR RACE?
Yes, I am of the human race, like you.

WHAT IS THE LAST THING YOU READ?
The Christian Bible, because I am regular kind of guy.

WHAT IS YOUR PET PEEVE?
Monsters. I think they are so terrible! Someone should destroy them all so that we, the humans, are safe. You come to castle?

DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A SOCIAL PERSON?
Here is the thing. I am very social person, but the people in my village are not so good to be friends with. For instance, sometimes they say things that are not true about other people in the village. It is not good to believe all of the things that are said in my village.

DO YOU WANT CHILDREN?
Yes you bring children with you to castle.

FAVORITE THINGS?
I like walking around in sunshine, eating regular foods, sleeping in normal human bed. I am regular human. Here is the thing though: when you come, it is better if you come at nighttime. You stay in your own private room at top of staircase. You have normal, regular sleep experience. In the morning, we go outside in the sun.

ARE YOU A 9-TO-5ER? OR ARE YOU YOUR OWN BOSS?
I am my own boss
posted by jcruelty at 12:17 PM on February 2, 2011 [39 favorites]

I will miss the helpful tips on how to take the best self taken photograph from OKC. and the quiver matches that go straight into spam because I never figured out how to turn the darn thing off


Sarcasm aside, MetaLove isn't a bad idea at all.

Its not an aside, its the core ingredient. That and obscure references. Plus beanplating yourself into corners.

What?
posted by infini at 12:18 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

"LoveMetafilter (LoveMe) is clearly the superior site name. DateMe would also work."

This... is not a terrible idea.

I dare you to go ask for a nuzzling pony in the grey.
posted by infini at 12:20 PM on February 2, 2011

The financial component could be responsible for some differences in how people use the site. To the extent that someone is more invested in really finding a significant other, they're probably more likely to put a little bit of cash behind that. If it's a free service, you're going to get people who are just checking it out, vaguely interested, and really interested all together. I do like how a free service means more useful data, as far as overall interest in people goes.

I met my husband of 4 years on match.com, so I obviously didn't have a problem with spending a wee bit of money. (Yup, I'm the one that put down the cash on that bet).
posted by bizzyb at 10:58 AM on February 2

Oh you poor thing! If only you were willing to spend a wee bit more at sugar daddy finder you could have landed a much better husband!

Clearly science has shown this:

					|     /
             quality of partner         |    /
					|   /
					|  /
					| /
					|___________ 
	
                              Money spent looking for partner

posted by special-k at 12:21 PM on February 2, 2011 [5 favorites]

Sarcasm aside, MetaLove isn't a bad idea at all.

Isn't metafilter a dating site already? What else are the profiles for? I guess it just doesn't have a very good success rate.
posted by fuq at 12:25 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

OKCupid always felt and operated like a startup. I think it got rounds of VC, no? In that case, this makes obvious sense since it's an exit. Oh well, money talks.
posted by xtine at 12:29 PM on February 2, 2011

Metafilter as a dating site? You've got to be kidding.

I can just see it - snarky comments everywhere, people bringing up your posting history ("your profile says that you like long walks on the beach, but 3 of your ask.metafilter questions are driving related..."), people "fixing" profiles for you...

Not to mention the hassle of logging in and out of MeFi when you stay over.
posted by carsonb at 12:36 PM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

Y'all Got Issues
posted by 23skidoo at 12:37 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

OK Cupid is/was owned by Humor Rainbow (links go to TechCrunch's CrunchBase entries for them)

Normally, I'd expect a company TechCrunch to know if a company had taken VC funding, so seeing nothing on either profile means they got funded but stayed under the radar, no one edited the info yet, or they're privately held.
posted by zippy at 12:40 PM on February 2, 2011

VentureBeat has more info, says Humor Rainbow received 6M in funding in 2007 and has 19 employees.

(and by privately held in the prev. comment, I meant to say "owned almost entirely by the founders)
posted by zippy at 12:43 PM on February 2, 2011

Gahhhhk. Capitalism ruins EVERYTHING.
posted by EatTheWeak at 12:43 PM on February 2, 2011

Capitalism ruins EVERYTHING.

Er, what? OKCupid existed to make money. It wouldn't be there at all without capitalism.

Plus, people seem to be assuming radical changes, which is not necessarily the case in an acquisition. We'll have to see what happens.
posted by wildcrdj at 12:45 PM on February 2, 2011

Awww, I am another person who met their partner through OKC. So I'm sad to hear of this, as I hope it doesn't change the experience for other people.
posted by Windigo at 12:50 PM on February 2, 2011

52% of the Internet is single. That's a market that's been dominated by dating sites. Let's take some of that market. I call it DateMe.

It's, like, "Hey, you want to go down to the whirlpool?" "Yeah, I don't have a husband." I call it ScrewMe.

How do we filter out the teases? We don't let them in. This goes for the guys, too. Because sometimes the guys are tapped out. But check your EULA, man. Because you're browsing FuckMe!

(shamelessly repeating myself from here)
posted by ODiV at 12:52 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Capitalism ruins EVERYTHING.

Er, what?

He's just upset because in a Marxist society he'd be given a sexual partner based on need.
posted by jonmc at 12:55 PM on February 2, 2011 [14 favorites]

This user profile popped up on Reddit the other day. It's now all I can think about when OKCupid is mentioned.

Open Source Programmer
posted by srboisvert at 12:58 PM on February 2, 2011

fuq: Isn't metafilter a dating site already? What else are the profiles for? I guess it just doesn't have a very good success rate.

Tell me about it. I clearly state in my profile: "Astute...Underrated...Compelling...Interesting". I mean, geez, who could resist such a dazzling portrayal?? But have I gotten one poke? I have not.
posted by Greg_Ace at 1:01 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

I love the idea of a dating site through Metafilter, and I look forward to the huge spike in anonymous relationship questions on the green, with subsequent whining on the gray. I also look forward to completely and creepily vetting my dates beforehand.

After all, we can't use OKC anymore because... wait, are we sure anything is going to change?
posted by jenlovesponies at 1:11 PM on February 2, 2011

I met baxter_ilion on OKC, and he ended up getting me involved here.

I'm sad to see this happen. OKC was a Good Thing.
posted by bibliogrrl at 1:14 PM on February 2, 2011

I met that guy who's been jerking me around for the past four months on OKCupid. Geez, now where will I go to be chatted up by married men and horny 19 year olds?
posted by dilettante at 1:14 PM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

Wait, MetaFilter isn't a dating site?

I've been on OKC for a while, and I've gone on about a dozen casual dates. There's been a very linear regression of the quality and accuracy of the matches over time as OKC grew.

In the beginning it was a lot of interesting, weird, different and fairly nerdy people. The early adopters. People said what they meant, and meant what they said. It was really straight forward.

Now, not so much. My first dates were awesome. My last couple of dates were not good matches to the point of basically backing away slowly and cursing OKC's malformed robot brains, and yet it's not entirely the fault of OKC, but probably more to do with the quality and quantity of the people using OKC. When someone lies to themselves or others things tend to go badly.

Match.com isn't buying what they think they're buying. The people that made OKC the success that it was are fleeing or have already fled.
posted by loquacious at 1:20 PM on February 2, 2011 [4 favorites]

F7U12.

Welp... time to send out a bunch of messages and GTFO.
posted by Grimp0teuthis at 1:24 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Wait, MetaFilter isn't a dating site?

Of course not. It's a post-breakup simulator.
posted by cortex at 1:27 PM on February 2, 2011 [13 favorites]

Wait, -T and I met through Metafilter two years ago. You mean you guys can't see Love Metafilter, the Purple? You must not have turned the option on in your profiles. Huh.
posted by peachfuzz at 1:29 PM on February 2, 2011

Of course not. It's a post-breakup simulator.

Well, that explains the rash. Thanks!
posted by loquacious at 1:37 PM on February 2, 2011

I Won't Murder You.

Are they actually going to fold OKCupid into Match.com, or just maintain it as a separate site and keep it free?

If a burger company buys out a fried chicken chain, it doesn't necessarily mean they're going to turn all the outlets into burger bars: they might just want to serve both markets.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 1:37 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

There is no way this will work out because..."You see, a pimp's love is very different from that of a square. "
posted by djrock3k at 1:47 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

I met my husband on usenet. Metafilter should have a usenet server.
posted by bleary at 1:51 PM on February 2, 2011

I met my husband on Metafilter.

LoveMe, indeed.
posted by Unicorn on the cob at 1:53 PM on February 2, 2011

If a burger company buys out a fried chicken chain, it doesn't necessarily mean they're going to turn all the outlets into burger bars: they might just want to serve both markets.

To continue your analogy, this is more like KFC purchasing Chick-Fil-A than it is like Burger King purchasing KFC.

From the eyes of the executives, they serve the exact same markets (even though the reality might be somewhat different); The difference is that Match can milk their target audiences for more money each month. I would not be at all surprised if this merger was solely intended to exterminate OKC so that Match could recruit more customers to their paid platform.

I'm usually not this cynical about mergers and acquisitions, but I have absolutely no confidence that Match has good intentions for OKCupid's userbase here.
posted by schmod at 2:21 PM on February 2, 2011

Weird. I've gotten a couple of messages from people who noticed that we're suddenly a 99% match. I looked at my matches yesterday, and suddenly my first 200+ matches are all 99%, when I know some of them were in the low 90% or 80% range. I figured they tweaked the matching algorithm again in some broken way, and that they'd probably tweak it back soon.

Now I wonder if it's based on a decision by their new owners, maybe trying to make it look more like the dating pool is amazing.
posted by free hugs at 2:24 PM on February 2, 2011

OKCupid CEO Responds -- "Everything's going to be alright. Nothing will change. Just like every other merger announcement in history."

He also commented that the userbases of the two sites will not be integrated. Given that this is coming from the CEO of one of the nerdiest companies on the planet, I assume this means that he will not attempt to calculate the area underneath my curves.
posted by schmod at 2:37 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

I've gotten a couple of messages from people who noticed that we're suddenly a 99% match. I looked at my matches yesterday, and suddenly my first 200+ matches are all 99%

Well, who doesn't love free hugs?
posted by mykescipark at 2:40 PM on February 2, 2011

dilettante: I met that guy who's been jerking me around for the past four months on OKCupid. Geez, now where will I go to be chatted up by married men and horny 19 year olds?

Oh thank god, I thought it was just my shitty luck. (That plus very sincere and nice messages from guys I've nothing in common with - think it was that part of the cycle, not the jerking around or non-responses, that made it too depressing to stick with.)
posted by carbide at 2:57 PM on February 2, 2011

(Er, accidentally deleted the "sorry you're having a lousy experience" there, double-sorry!)
posted by carbide at 3:00 PM on February 2, 2011

OKCupid CEO responds:

OKCupid's datahound Christian Rudder used publicly available data to guess at the success rates of eHarmony and Match.com, and decided they came up short. ... Now that Match.com has bought OKCupid, that post has been removed from OKCupid's blog ...

But Match.com didn't ask OKCupid to take down the post, CEO Sam Yagan told The Observer, it was just the "common sense thing to do." ... Furthermore, the data that OKCupid gathered from Match.com's public filings and press kit were not completely accurate, he said, which he realized once he saw the real data.

"Upon having more knowledge as we've gone through the process of getting to know Match and them getting to know us, some of the conclusions we drew are not quite as exaggerated as we made them out to be," he said.

Mr. Yagan did not reveal what the real data says or how big the discrepancy was, but said that Match.com is better at getting people together than he originally believed. "In general the totality of data that we have become exposed to leads us to believe that yes, the subscription sites are probably more successful than the post made them out to be," he said.

Previously:

'How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?'

'Four.'

'And if the party says that it is not four but five -- then how many?'

'Four.'

The word ended in a gasp of pain. ...

'How many fingers, Winston?'

'Four.'

The needle went up to sixty.

'How many fingers, Winston?'

'Four! Four! What else can I say? Four!'

The needle must have risen again, but he did not look at it.

'How many fingers, Winston?'

'Five! Five! Five!'

'No, Winston, that is no use. You are lying. You still think there are four. How many fingers, please?'

'Four! Five! Four! Anything you like. Only stop it, stop the pain!'

posted by maudlin at 3:11 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

Actually his response isn't totally unbelievable. You'd be amazed how bad people are at estimating numbers of other companies. When I see estimates about YouTube (cost, bandwidth, etc) they're almost always ridiculously wrong.

Now, I'm sure there's some playing-nice going on too. But the idea that their wild off-the-cuff estimates were wrong and led to exaggerated conclusions is completely plausible.
posted by wildcrdj at 3:18 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

@special-k :p Notice I said nothing about the quality of what you get -- just the level of commitment to searching.

(love the figure though!)
posted by bizzyb at 3:26 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Aw man. I hated Match and loved OKC.

Okay, so I have a big OKC question that I've been meaning to ask in AskMe but never got around to, so I will ask here.

I had a profile there but I haven't called up the site in about three years. I was under the impression that if you don't log in for X amount of time, you drop out of searches. I assumed I was basically invisible there. But every few months, I get email saying "someone just looked at your profile!" (or similar wording.)
The only explanation I came up with is that it's that one creepy guy who kept bugging me wo has been looking at my profile from a bookmark......Can anyone think of something more benign?
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:52 PM on February 2, 2011

Actually his response isn't totally unbelievable.

But they could have just replaced the post with the statement he gave to the paper in the first place, or they could have updated the post to reflect the new understanding. Who is it thought that just deleting it with no immediate explanation would be a good idea?
posted by robertc at 3:56 PM on February 2, 2011

K.O. Cupid.
posted by thejoshu at 4:02 PM on February 2, 2011 [2 favorites]

I'm an introvert, so dating/meetup/matchmaking sites are of no use to me. Is there anything out there that is like an anti-dating site? I create a profile and it suggests interesting experiences that will involve as little human contact as possible. Like, all the potential 'matches' are things to do or places to see. That might be cool.
posted by Ritchie at 4:30 PM on February 2, 2011

Okcupid is full of introverts, tbh.
posted by empath at 4:31 PM on February 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

I met my husband on Metafilter.

The comments on this post have made me long for a wiki about Metafilter romances. Or at least a mention in Metatalk...
posted by artemisia at 4:48 PM on February 2, 2011

LoveMetafilter (LoveMe) is clearly the superior site name. DateMe would also work.

TellMe about it.
posted by dhartung at 4:55 PM on February 2, 2011

CunningLinguist, it could also be bored users trying the advanced search and overriding the defaults for how recently someone has logged in.
posted by zippy at 5:42 PM on February 2, 2011

Gads. I didn't know there were such overrides.
posted by CunningLinguist at 5:51 PM on February 2, 2011

CunningLinguist - basically, that email is just so you will log in before your account ends.
posted by bibliogrrl at 6:15 PM on February 2, 2011

Weird. I've gotten a couple of messages from people who noticed that we're suddenly a 99% match... Now I wonder if it's based on a decision by their new owners

I talked to someone who knows someone who knows someone, so don't take this as the gospel truth. But my understanding is that they tweaked something in their algorithm dealing with how "irrelevant" answers are factored into the match percentage. But yeah, the timing's a little weird.
posted by the_bone at 6:23 PM on February 2, 2011

As OKC's oldest active user, I feel I should have been consulted before this merger.
posted by jasonstevanhill at 6:48 PM on February 2, 2011

Intuit did it to Mint. It's the way of capitalism. These services don't exist for the sake of benevolence.
posted by Señor Pantalones at 9:19 PM on February 2, 2011

Chrysostom: "Same here"

Me too! Been married 1 1/2 years at this point. And yeah, $50 million is shockingly low.

For the past couple of years OkCupid has been trying to get people to give them money, either via credits or premium services, etc. I always sort of saw them as the NPR of dating websites in that respect. So sorry to see them get acquired by Match, but it could have been a LOT worse. Imagine if they'd been bought out by eHarmony, the Fox News of dating webistes?
posted by Deathalicious at 11:07 PM on February 2, 2011 [3 favorites]

I looked at my matches yesterday, and suddenly my first 200+ matches are all 99%, when I know some of them were in the low 90% or 80% range. I figured they tweaked the matching algorithm again in some broken way, and that they'd probably tweak it back soon.

Yeah, I noticed that too. All of a sudden I was getting a ton more matches north of 90%. Anyone else?
posted by valkyryn at 5:07 AM on February 3, 2011

I don't mind if Match dilutes OKC's matching approach to some degree.

What concerns me is that OKC is the only dating site I know that is good for people of all sexualities and genders, inclusive of transgendered people, and has a polyamorous option (married/dating + looking for = "Available"). If they lose that, so help me god, I will shit in their mail slot.
posted by Netzapper at 6:34 AM on February 3, 2011 [1 favorite]

All of a sudden I was getting a ton more matches north of 90%. Anyone else?

Hmmmm, all my match percentages stayed right where they were.
posted by 23skidoo at 6:47 AM on February 3, 2011

"Is there anything out there that is like an anti-dating site? I create a profile and it suggests interesting experiences that will involve as little human contact as possible. Like, all the potential 'matches' are things to do or places to see. That might be cool."

I've never used the site, but have you checked out Howaboutwe?
posted by Eideteker at 7:16 AM on February 3, 2011

Ritchie: "I'm an introvert, so dating/meetup/matchmaking sites are of no use to me. Is there anything out there that is like an anti-dating site?"

isolatr?
posted by The Lurkers Support Me in Email at 8:49 AM on February 3, 2011 [2 favorites]

What concerns me is that OKC is the only dating site I know that is good for people of all sexualities and genders, inclusive of transgendered people, and has a polyamorous option (married/dating + looking for = "Available"). If they lose that, so help me god, I will shit in their mail slot

Maybe its a plot to bring family values back to where they ... uh.. belong?
posted by infini at 9:05 AM on February 3, 2011

has a polyamorous option (married/dating + looking for = "Available").

Yeah, I botched that and had myself listed as available for a while, and was wondering why no one responded to me :(
posted by empath at 9:51 AM on February 3, 2011

"Is there anything out there that is like an anti-dating site? I create a profile and it suggests interesting experiences that will involve as little human contact as possible. Like, all the potential 'matches' are things to do or places to see. That might be cool."

"Foursquare is designed to show popular trending places or where your friends are. I instead used it for antisocial purposes."
posted by the latin mouse at 12:48 PM on February 3, 2011 [5 favorites]

"Foursquare is designed to show popular trending places or where your friends are. I instead used it for antisocial purposes."

I was expecting him to say he tracks where his friends go and then stays away. Cuz that's what I do. ;)

I also use "invisible mode" on IM to tell when friends are online and unlikely to be out somewhere I might go. Stay away, I'm trying to read!
posted by mrgrimm at 9:43 AM on February 4, 2011

Dunno what it's like in the States, but over here OKCupid is quite lousy with creepy guys - based on my own and friends' experiences - where you talk of it as though it's where all the cool single people hang out.

- Awkward date with someone who was funny online and had no social skills in reality. Refused his offer of a drink because it felt mean.
- Man from Australia e-mailed me - without prior contact - to tell me he had googled an unusual phrase on my profile and found my blog, which he now read all the time.
- Bloke constantly e-mailing me to ask me why I hadn't responded to him (I was just busy)
- Got talking to an American schoolteacher who was really nice, we swapped e-mails, then he just disappeared. I found on Facebook that he was the subject of a group about how weird and creepy he was (every school seems ot have a similar teacher, mind).

On the other hand, many I know met nice folk through Match and the Guardian's personals. May just be confirmation bias, but like Metafilter, the sign-up fees seem to serve a purpose.
I met one guy on the Guardian site who was really nice, and ended up marrying another member within a year - I'm still in contact with him, after a fashion - and there were more interesting folk and less 'hi bb howru'.
posted by mippy at 8:22 AM on February 10, 2011 [1 favorite]

Although - an ex of mine was an enthusiastic user (we didn't meet there) which may have coloured my view. He told me 'I use it to find vulnerable women' and it was accidentally running across his new account (questions important to him: 'have you ever taken antidepressants' and 'would you date a married couple') that confirmed he was something of a nogoodnik.
posted by mippy at 8:24 AM on February 10, 2011

Mippy: "Dunno what it's like in the States, but over here OKCupid is quite lousy with creepy guys - based on my own and friends' experiences - where you talk of it as though it's where all the cool single people hang out."

OKCupid is only where the cool single people hang out if you're prepared to spend some time customising all your privacy settings and then answering a bunch of match questions so that the algorithm can work its magic.

I'm in the UK and I've had great experiences with the site, but only after that initial barrier had been overcome.

I recently did a fairly comprehensive guide to exactly what settings are needed to make the site usable in response to this AskMe, but I ended up sending it via memail instead. (I'd used my own profile as an example and didn't want to link the two accounts where Google could see.) If anybody's finding OKCupid an unusable creeperfest, just drop me a line and I'll send it to you. The guide's aimed at het women, but some of it will be helpful for anybody.
posted by the latin mouse at 10:33 AM on February 10, 2011

Well, another friend went on a very positive-sounding date so perhaps it's gotten better!

It might be worth you doing a profile-neutral version though so others can see - or host it anonymously somewhere away from your main screen-name.
posted by mippy at 1:39 AM on February 11, 2011

Oh, and when I used it - although I wasn't that serious about it - I did all the match questions. My odd ex was my 2nd best match. How strange.
posted by mippy at 1:40 AM on February 11, 2011