Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Fabswingers.com site feedback |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Admin x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Would it be a good idea, in the left sidebar, by where the verification summary is shown, to have another useful statistic - the %age of mails that the person(s) in the profile replies to and/or how many just remain permanently unopened? It might cast a light on who is serious and who are the time wasters. " How does not replying to mail make someone a time waster? I don't reply to all my mail and sometimes just delete them without reading mainly because I can tell from the message if they have read my profile or not. I could say those that don't read and send a message are making me waste my time as I have to delete them but I only have one definition of a timewaster and that is not it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus there are reasons some messages get no reply, in my case when it's obvous they have not taken the time to read my profile properly then I do not reply and just delete " Exactly! The majority of emails we receive were sent by folk who have paid scant, if any, attention to a word that is on our profile and that is almost always immediately obvious. So why should we be adjudged time wasters by people who waste their own, and others, time be sending such drivel!? People should be asking themselves as to why their messages remain unopened or not answered instead of always trying to apportion blame elsewhere. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!! "Because if you don't reply then it's not going to look great is it, all them people you would put off because your % of un replied mails is huge. I certainly don't want to spend my time answering mail from people who haven't read my profile and I don't see why I should be penalised for it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!! "Because people would feel the need to raise a statistic, that's generally pretty natural. Most people like a 100% statistic alongside their name. But if folk can't be bothered to read profiles or just bombard single women/couples with messages, who are the real time wasters? Everyone who reads our profile gets a reply unless they keep messaging after we've attempted to end. Everyone who doesn't read it, doesn't. What about folk who get bombarded?? We had over 500 emails In our first 48 hours on the site, that equated to about 495 non replies. You can't reply to that number so does that make single women and couples fakes because starting on such negatives will leave a stat that will almost never rise over a few per cent? Yes we get people who don't reply, live with it and ask yourself why, rather than attempting to raise a number so it looks as though others are the time wasters when, from our experience, it is usually the greater % of guys who fail to address the wants/needs/standards required by the people whose attention they're trying to gain. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!!
Because if you don't reply then it's not going to look great is it, all them people you would put off because your % of un replied mails is huge.
I certainly don't want to spend my time answering mail from people who haven't read my profile and I don't see why I should be penalised for it. "But its an accurate statistic. It's hardly a penalisation! If I saw that a woman rarely replied, I wouldn't waste my time. Women who reply often, ill message. That's not penalising the woman is it? Simply allowing men to direct their attention better. If a woman doesn't reply often, she obviously doesn't appreciate/act on the messages as much as a woman who does reply. Men who send messages want an action, a reply of some sort...What's the problem with that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!!
Because people would feel the need to raise a statistic, that's generally pretty natural. Most people like a 100% statistic alongside their name. But if folk can't be bothered to read profiles or just bombard single women/couples with messages, who are the real time wasters?
Everyone who reads our profile gets a reply unless they keep messaging after we've attempted to end.
Everyone who doesn't read it, doesn't.
What about folk who get bombarded?? We had over 500 emails In our first 48 hours on the site, that equated to about 495 non replies. You can't reply to that number so does that make single women and couples fakes because starting on such negatives will leave a stat that will almost never rise over a few per cent?
Yes we get people who don't reply, live with it and ask yourself why, rather than attempting to raise a number so it looks as though others are the time wasters when, from our experience, it is usually the greater % of guys who fail to address the wants/needs/standards required by the people whose attention they're trying to gain. "Personally, I think you're reading too much into it. Ofcourse, people like 100% on their profile but the reply rate is exactly that... A reply rate.... Not a person rate... The best woman in the world may not reply to any messages at all. Thar doesn't make her a bad person. It simply implies that she doesnt reply to messages! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!!
Because people would feel the need to raise a statistic, that's generally pretty natural. Most people like a 100% statistic alongside their name. But if folk can't be bothered to read profiles or just bombard single women/couples with messages, who are the real time wasters?
Everyone who reads our profile gets a reply unless they keep messaging after we've attempted to end.
Everyone who doesn't read it, doesn't.
What about folk who get bombarded?? We had over 500 emails In our first 48 hours on the site, that equated to about 495 non replies. You can't reply to that number so does that make single women and couples fakes because starting on such negatives will leave a stat that will almost never rise over a few per cent?
Yes we get people who don't reply, live with it and ask yourself why, rather than attempting to raise a number so it looks as though others are the time wasters when, from our experience, it is usually the greater % of guys who fail to address the wants/needs/standards required by the people whose attention they're trying to gain.
Personally, I think you're reading too much into it. Ofcourse, people like 100% on their profile but the reply rate is exactly that... A reply rate.... Not a person rate... The best woman in the world may not reply to any messages at all. Thar doesn't make her a bad person. It simply implies that she doesnt reply to messages!"I'm sorry but that's just made me lol, in the eyes of some people on here that would make her a leper. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!!
Because people would feel the need to raise a statistic, that's generally pretty natural. Most people like a 100% statistic alongside their name. But if folk can't be bothered to read profiles or just bombard single women/couples with messages, who are the real time wasters?
Everyone who reads our profile gets a reply unless they keep messaging after we've attempted to end.
Everyone who doesn't read it, doesn't.
What about folk who get bombarded?? We had over 500 emails In our first 48 hours on the site, that equated to about 495 non replies. You can't reply to that number so does that make single women and couples fakes because starting on such negatives will leave a stat that will almost never rise over a few per cent?
Yes we get people who don't reply, live with it and ask yourself why, rather than attempting to raise a number so it looks as though others are the time wasters when, from our experience, it is usually the greater % of guys who fail to address the wants/needs/standards required by the people whose attention they're trying to gain.
Personally, I think you're reading too much into it. Ofcourse, people like 100% on their profile but the reply rate is exactly that... A reply rate.... Not a person rate... The best woman in the world may not reply to any messages at all. Thar doesn't make her a bad person. It simply implies that she doesnt reply to messages!
I'm sorry but that's just made me lol, in the eyes of some people on here that would make her a leper. "Lol, but seriously, surely a woman wouldn't be so conscious of her reply rate so as to feel under pressure?!? I really think its a good idea. Allow me to explain. A guy has 20 minutes free. He finds two women he likes, reads their profiles ans writes good quality messages. An hour later, she comes hoping to see a reply... Both messages have been read and deleted... The next day... The guy doesn't bother reading profiles... Just sends 10 women a crappy 2 line message each.... An hour later.. bingo. Two replies in the same amount of time. This may sound ridiculous but this is actually what happens. Now if the women had good reply rates, the men wouldn't have to send shit messages, and actually, the quality of messages would enhance I think...Because then, all the attention goes to the repliers instead of sending crap messages to random women hoping for a reply. I strongly feel this is a great idea! Xxx | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!! o
Because if you don't reply then it's not going to look great is it, all them people you would put off because your % of un replied mails is huge.
I certainly don't want to spend my time answering mail from people who haven't read my profile and I don't see why I should be penalised for it.
But its an accurate statistic. It's hardly a penalisation!
If I saw that a woman rarely replied, I wouldn't waste my time. Women who reply often, ill message. That's not penalising the woman is it? Simply allowing men to direct their attention better.
If a woman doesn't reply often, she obviously doesn't appreciate/act on the messages as much as a woman who does reply. Men who send messages want an action, a reply of some sort...What's the problem with that?
"Yes but why should we reply if you as a guy have obviously not taken the time to read our profile properly, if I was going to send a message I would read the profile first as it could be wasting my time sending one otherwise, simple really if you can't be bothered to read the profile why should we bother to reply | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!!
Because people would feel the need to raise a statistic, that's generally pretty natural. Most people like a 100% statistic alongside their name. But if folk can't be bothered to read profiles or just bombard single women/couples with messages, who are the real time wasters?
Everyone who reads our profile gets a reply unless they keep messaging after we've attempted to end.
Everyone who doesn't read it, doesn't.
What about folk who get bombarded?? We had over 500 emails In our first 48 hours on the site, that equated to about 495 non replies. You can't reply to that number so does that make single women and couples fakes because starting on such negatives will leave a stat that will almost never rise over a few per cent?
Yes we get people who don't reply, live with it and ask yourself why, rather than attempting to raise a number so it looks as though others are the time wasters when, from our experience, it is usually the greater % of guys who fail to address the wants/needs/standards required by the people whose attention they're trying to gain.
Personally, I think you're reading too much into it. Ofcourse, people like 100% on their profile but the reply rate is exactly that... A reply rate.... Not a person rate... The best woman in the world may not reply to any messages at all. Thar doesn't make her a bad person. It simply implies that she doesnt reply to messages!
I'm sorry but that's just made me lol, in the eyes of some people on here that would make her a leper.
Lol, but seriously, surely a woman wouldn't be so conscious of her reply rate so as to feel under pressure?!?
I really think its a good idea. Allow me to explain.
A guy has 20 minutes free.
He finds two women he likes, reads their profiles ans writes good quality messages.
An hour later, she comes hoping to see a reply... Both messages have been read and deleted...
The next day... The guy doesn't bother reading profiles... Just sends 10 women a crappy 2 line message each....
An hour later.. bingo. Two replies in the same amount of time.
This may sound ridiculous but this is actually what happens.
Now if the women had good reply rates, the men wouldn't have to send shit messages, and actually, the quality of messages would enhance I think...Because then, all the attention goes to the repliers instead of sending crap messages to random women hoping for a reply.
I strongly feel this is a great idea!
Xxx"What a load of tosh IMO. Just take the read and deleted as not interested, I have had great messages that have been let down by one thing so I haven't replied and one liners that have made me smile so have got a reply. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!!
Because people would feel the need to raise a statistic, that's generally pretty natural. Most people like a 100% statistic alongside their name. But if folk can't be bothered to read profiles or just bombard single women/couples with messages, who are the real time wasters?
Everyone who reads our profile gets a reply unless they keep messaging after we've attempted to end.
Everyone who doesn't read it, doesn't.
What about folk who get bombarded?? We had over 500 emails In our first 48 hours on the site, that equated to about 495 non replies. You can't reply to that number so does that make single women and couples fakes because starting on such negatives will leave a stat that will almost never rise over a few per cent?
Yes we get people who don't reply, live with it and ask yourself why, rather than attempting to raise a number so it looks as though others are the time wasters when, from our experience, it is usually the greater % of guys who fail to address the wants/needs/standards required by the people whose attention they're trying to gain.
Personally, I think you're reading too much into it. Ofcourse, people like 100% on their profile but the reply rate is exactly that... A reply rate.... Not a person rate... The best woman in the world may not reply to any messages at all. Thar doesn't make her a bad person. It simply implies that she doesnt reply to messages!
I'm sorry but that's just made me lol, in the eyes of some people on here that would make her a leper.
Lol, but seriously, surely a woman wouldn't be so conscious of her reply rate so as to feel under pressure?!?
I really think its a good idea. Allow me to explain.
A guy has 20 minutes free.
He finds two women he likes, reads their profiles ans writes good quality messages.
An hour later, she comes hoping to see a reply... Both messages have been read and deleted...
The next day... The guy doesn't bother reading profiles... Just sends 10 women a crappy 2 line message each....
An hour later.. bingo. Two replies in the same amount of time.
This may sound ridiculous but this is actually what happens.
Now if the women had good reply rates, the men wouldn't have to send shit messages, and actually, the quality of messages would enhance I think...Because then, all the attention goes to the repliers instead of sending crap messages to random women hoping for a reply.
I strongly feel this is a great idea!
Xxx
What a load of tosh IMO. Just take the read and deleted as not interested, I have had great messages that have been let down by one thing so I haven't replied and one liners that have made me smile so have got a reply."Well, were all entitled to our opinions I guess. Personally, i'd love this new feature as I'd focus my time on sending good messages to repliers. I don't have time to send good messages to everyone lol. If this feature was here, I could better aim at the ones I'm looking for and not bother with the ones who don't reply! Xxx | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!!
Because people would feel the need to raise a statistic, that's generally pretty natural. Most people like a 100% statistic alongside their name. But if folk can't be bothered to read profiles or just bombard single women/couples with messages, who are the real time wasters?
Everyone who reads our profile gets a reply unless they keep messaging after we've attempted to end.
Everyone who doesn't read it, doesn't.
What about folk who get bombarded?? We had over 500 emails In our first 48 hours on the site, that equated to about 495 non replies. You can't reply to that number so does that make single women and couples fakes because starting on such negatives will leave a stat that will almost never rise over a few per cent?
Yes we get people who don't reply, live with it and ask yourself why, rather than attempting to raise a number so it looks as though others are the time wasters when, from our experience, it is usually the greater % of guys who fail to address the wants/needs/standards required by the people whose attention they're trying to gain.
Personally, I think you're reading too much into it. Ofcourse, people like 100% on their profile but the reply rate is exactly that... A reply rate.... Not a person rate... The best woman in the world may not reply to any messages at all. Thar doesn't make her a bad person. It simply implies that she doesnt reply to messages!
I'm sorry but that's just made me lol, in the eyes of some people on here that would make her a leper.
Lol, but seriously, surely a woman wouldn't be so conscious of her reply rate so as to feel under pressure?!?
I really think its a good idea. Allow me to explain.
A guy has 20 minutes free.
He finds two women he likes, reads their profiles ans writes good quality messages.
An hour later, she comes hoping to see a reply... Both messages have been read and deleted...
The next day... The guy doesn't bother reading profiles... Just sends 10 women a crappy 2 line message each....
An hour later.. bingo. Two replies in the same amount of time.
This may sound ridiculous but this is actually what happens.
Now if the women had good reply rates, the men wouldn't have to send shit messages, and actually, the quality of messages would enhance I think...Because then, all the attention goes to the repliers instead of sending crap messages to random women hoping for a reply.
I strongly feel this is a great idea!
Xxx
What a load of tosh IMO. Just take the read and deleted as not interested, I have had great messages that have been let down by one thing so I haven't replied and one liners that have made me smile so have got a reply.
Well, were all entitled to our opinions I guess.
Personally, i'd love this new feature as I'd focus my time on sending good messages to repliers.
I don't have time to send good messages to everyone lol. If this feature was here, I could better aim at the ones I'm looking for and not bother with the ones who don't reply!
Xxx"I wonder how many of those who reply are replying with a negative. Anyways it's not going to happen as admin have already said what happened when they tried it on another site so it looks like everyone is just going to have to use the site the way they want and let others do the same | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"stupid idea.. you'll be "forced" to reply to everyone (so you dont look like you dont reply), and there will be continuous messages going back and forth forever going no where even if you have no interest. Admin have it right.. If you dont get a reply, they are simply not interested - move on. "
And stop whining and blaming it on others! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!!
Because people would feel the need to raise a statistic, that's generally pretty natural. Most people like a 100% statistic alongside their name. But if folk can't be bothered to read profiles or just bombard single women/couples with messages, who are the real time wasters?
Everyone who reads our profile gets a reply unless they keep messaging after we've attempted to end.
Everyone who doesn't read it, doesn't.
What about folk who get bombarded?? We had over 500 emails In our first 48 hours on the site, that equated to about 495 non replies. You can't reply to that number so does that make single women and couples fakes because starting on such negatives will leave a stat that will almost never rise over a few per cent?
Yes we get people who don't reply, live with it and ask yourself why, rather than attempting to raise a number so it looks as though others are the time wasters when, from our experience, it is usually the greater % of guys who fail to address the wants/needs/standards required by the people whose attention they're trying to gain.
Personally, I think you're reading too much into it. Ofcourse, people like 100% on their profile but the reply rate is exactly that... A reply rate.... Not a person rate... The best woman in the world may not reply to any messages at all. Thar doesn't make her a bad person. It simply implies that she doesnt reply to messages!
I'm sorry but that's just made me lol, in the eyes of some people on here that would make her a leper.
Lol, but seriously, surely a woman wouldn't be so conscious of her reply rate so as to feel under pressure?!?
I really think its a good idea. Allow me to explain.
A guy has 20 minutes free.
He finds two women he likes, reads their profiles ans writes good quality messages.
An hour later, she comes hoping to see a reply... Both messages have been read and deleted...
The next day... The guy doesn't bother reading profiles... Just sends 10 women a crappy 2 line message each....
An hour later.. bingo. Two replies in the same amount of time.
This may sound ridiculous but this is actually what happens.
Now if the women had good reply rates, the men wouldn't have to send shit messages, and actually, the quality of messages would enhance I think...Because then, all the attention goes to the repliers instead of sending crap messages to random women hoping for a reply.
I strongly feel this is a great idea!
Xxx
What a load of tosh IMO. Just take the read and deleted as not interested, I have had great messages that have been let down by one thing so I haven't replied and one liners that have made me smile so have got a reply.
Well, were all entitled to our opinions I guess.
Personally, i'd love this new feature as I'd focus my time on sending good messages to repliers.
I don't have time to send good messages to everyone lol. If this feature was here, I could better aim at the ones I'm looking for and not bother with the ones who don't reply!
Xxx
I wonder how many of those who reply are replying with a negative.
Anyways it's not going to happen as admin have already said what happened when they tried it on another site so it looks like everyone is just going to have to use the site the way they want and let others do the same "I don't know hun but I prefer a negative message rather than no message - though I understand im alone on this one! Yep. Xx | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"stupid idea.. you'll be "forced" to reply to everyone (so you dont look like you dont reply), and there will be continuous messages going back and forth forever going no where even if you have no interest. Admin have it right.. If you dont get a reply, they are simply not interested - move on. "Like I said before... I disagree! But each to their own I guess. What's more important is that admin up there actually owns the site and they can do as they wish! Ps... Leeds couple, we weren't whinging if you read it...  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"stupid idea.. you'll be "forced" to reply to everyone (so you dont look like you dont reply), and there will be continuous messages going back and forth forever going no where even if you have no interest. Admin have it right.. If you dont get a reply, they are simply not interested - move on.
Like I said before... I disagree!
But each to their own I guess. What's more important is that admin up there actually owns the site and they can do as they wish!
Ps... Leeds couple, we weren't whinging if you read it..."No you dont understand, your not looking at it properly. You ARE forced to reply. Because the moment one of you stops messaging back and forth (even if you have absolutely no interest), it goes against your "reply score". That way you are in a never ending spiral of messages with everyone you are messaged by until one backs out.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
If you are proud of your stats, and want to display them you can do.
If feel that the truth may hurt, you can hide it.
For what it's worth, I don't have a problem with the deleted messages. At least the "hello" went to someone that did something with it. It's all the "people" who leave messages unopened that get up my nose. Chances are that the profiles are just there to waste everybody's time, and some form of a hint as to the chances of getting a reply would be appreciated.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"stupid idea.. you'll be "forced" to reply to everyone (so you dont look like you dont reply), and there will be continuous messages going back and forth forever going no where even if you have no interest. Admin have it right.. If you dont get a reply, they are simply not interested - move on.
Like I said before... I disagree!
But each to their own I guess. What's more important is that admin up there actually owns the site and they can do as they wish!
Ps... Leeds couple, we weren't whinging if you read it...
No you dont understand, your not looking at it properly.
You ARE forced to reply.
Because the moment one of you stops messaging back and forth (even if you have absolutely no interest), it goes against your "reply score".
That way you are in a never ending spiral of messages with everyone you are messaged by until one backs out.."I've had my say ans expressed it clear enough so I'm not going to post on this again... I do understand what you mean though. But you're not forced to reply. Nobody is forced to do anything. I think what you're trying to say is that women will feel as though to be valued, they should reply. To make their score high so they look good. To cheat the system. To make themselves look like repliers when they are not. But that's not the point of this... The point isn't to degrade women or make some better than others. Replying has nothing to do with how a person is.. how good they are... This is simply to find women who reply to messages, nothing more, nothing less. If women reply to messages, theyre likely to get more attention. If women don't reply, they're less likely to get attention... Tell me why that isn't fair? Not only that, for me personally, I wouldn't spend time reading profiles and writing good messages to women who I don't expect a reply from - not because I don't think she's good... Simply because I'm on here for one thing and just like women, I don't have all the time in the world to do this! I'd target ones who have time to reply. Anyway, I'm not going to explain again... As I said, each to their own. And also sh have decided, end of story. Xxxxxx | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"stupid idea.. you'll be "forced" to reply to everyone (so you dont look like you dont reply), and there will be continuous messages going back and forth forever going no where even if you have no interest. Admin have it right.. If you dont get a reply, they are simply not interested - move on.
Like I said before... I disagree!
But each to their own I guess. What's more important is that admin up there actually owns the site and they can do as they wish!
Ps... Leeds couple, we weren't whinging if you read it...
No you dont understand, your not looking at it properly.
You ARE forced to reply.
Because the moment one of you stops messaging back and forth (even if you have absolutely no interest), it goes against your "reply score".
That way you are in a never ending spiral of messages with everyone you are messaged by until one backs out..
I've had my say ans expressed it clear enough so I'm not going to post on this again... I do understand what you mean though.
But you're not forced to reply. Nobody is forced to do anything. I think what you're trying to say is that women will feel as though to be valued, they should reply. To make their score high so they look good. To cheat the system. To make themselves look like repliers when they are not.
But that's not the point of this... The point isn't to degrade women or make some better than others. Replying has nothing to do with how a person is.. how good they are... This is simply to find women who reply to messages, nothing more, nothing less.
If women reply to messages, theyre likely to get more attention. If women don't reply, they're less likely to get attention... Tell me why that isn't fair?
Not only that, for me personally, I wouldn't spend time reading profiles and writing good messages to women who I don't expect a reply from - not because I don't think she's good... Simply because I'm on here for one thing and just like women, I don't have all the time in the world to do this! I'd target ones who have time to reply.
Anyway, I'm not going to explain again... As I said, each to their own. And also sh have decided, end of story.
Xxxxxx"It's a completely ridiculous idea, as stated above both parties will feel the need to enter a never ending spiral of messages as neither will want their score compromised by not replying. And those who are bombarded by crass, crude or ignorant messages or those they don't want to speak with will look bad. EG this afternoon we've received 8 messages, not one of which has bothered to read our profile or address what it states, so none have received a reply. Now our profile is quite clear on what we're not looking for. So because most guys see a naked femme and don't bother to read the text, we look like we never reply whereas the reality is, most people don't read properly. We feel this is just the a typical time waster trying to apportion blame on others for not receiving feedback. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Men who send messages want an action, a reply of some sort...What's the problem with that? "The problem with that is that there expectations and sense of entitlement say a lot about them | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!!
Because people would feel the need to raise a statistic, that's generally pretty natural. Most people like a 100% statistic alongside their name. But if folk can't be bothered to read profiles or just bombard single women/couples with messages, who are the real time wasters?
Everyone who reads our profile gets a reply unless they keep messaging after we've attempted to end.
Everyone who doesn't read it, doesn't.
What about folk who get bombarded?? We had over 500 emails In our first 48 hours on the site, that equated to about 495 non replies. You can't reply to that number so does that make single women and couples fakes because starting on such negatives will leave a stat that will almost never rise over a few per cent?
Yes we get people who don't reply, live with it and ask yourself why, rather than attempting to raise a number so it looks as though others are the time wasters when, from our experience, it is usually the greater % of guys who fail to address the wants/needs/standards required by the people whose attention they're trying to gain.
Personally, I think you're reading too much into it. Ofcourse, people like 100% on their profile but the reply rate is exactly that... A reply rate.... Not a person rate... The best woman in the world may not reply to any messages at all. Thar doesn't make her a bad person. It simply implies that she doesnt reply to messages!
I'm sorry but that's just made me lol, in the eyes of some people on here that would make her a leper.
Lol, but seriously, surely a woman wouldn't be so conscious of her reply rate so as to feel under pressure?!?
I really think its a good idea. Allow me to explain.
A guy has 20 minutes free.
He finds two women he likes, reads their profiles ans writes good quality messages.
An hour later, she comes hoping to see a reply... Both messages have been read and deleted...
The next day... The guy doesn't bother reading profiles... Just sends 10 women a crappy 2 line message each....
An hour later.. bingo. Two replies in the same amount of time.
This may sound ridiculous but this is actually what happens.
Now if the women had good reply rates, the men wouldn't have to send shit messages, and actually, the quality of messages would enhance I think...Because then, all the attention goes to the repliers instead of sending crap messages to random women hoping for a reply.
I strongly feel this is a great idea!
Xxx"So if on Monday I get 50 messages and 49 of them say 'wanna fuck' or some other total crap so I just delete them. My reply rate is 1/50. Then joe blogs goes to send me a message which is a lovely message, we would be really compatible but he sees my 1/50 and thinks oh she's a miserable cow who never replies so he doesn't bother.... Who's losing out there?? I am, for not getting a good message off a decent chap. He is, because his opinion of me is skewed by a statistic that has been made to look rubbish by 49 idiots who can't be bothered to read a profile and write a alf decent message! It's a terrible idea! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
no reply = not interested,,
no thanks message = not interested
not read = probably see above because
Ladies and others often read your profile before reading your message, why read a message if they ve read your profile and Don t like what they ve read or seen,, really it can be that simple, 
If you target the ladies who reply,, that would mean those ladies would have an ever expanding amount of messages to answer ,,,
My suggestion look at your inbox and ignore your outbox, I personally think its a ridiculous idea,,  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We tried this on another site ages ago. It made it worse not better because people felt obliged to reply, which we don't think is right. If someone doesn't reply just take it they're not interested and you'll enjoy the site more
Admin x"Have to say I agree, if I don't receive a reply then I know they're not interested, that's fine by me. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"stupid idea.. you'll be "forced" to reply to everyone (so you dont look like you dont reply), and there will be continuous messages going back and forth forever going no where even if you have no interest. Admin have it right.. If you dont get a reply, they are simply not interested - move on.
Like I said before... I disagree!
But each to their own I guess. What's moe important is that admin up there actually owns the site and they can do as they wish!
Ps... Leeds couple, we weren't whinging if you read it...
No you dont understand, your not looking at it properly.
You ARE forced to reply.
Because the moment one of you stops messaging back and forth (even if you have absolutely no interest), it goes against your "reply score".
That way you are in a never ending spiral of messages with everyone you are messaged by until one backs out..
I've had my say ans expressed it clear enough so I'm not going to post on this again... I do understand what you mean though.
But you're not forced to reply. Nobody is forced to do anything. I think what you're trying to say is that women will feel as though to be valued, they should reply. To make their score high so they look good. To cheat the system. To make themselves look like repliers when they are not.
But that's not the point of this... The point isn't to degrade women or make some better than others. Replying has nothing to do with how a person is.. how good they are... This is simply to find women who reply to messages, nothing more, nothing less.
If women reply to messages, theyre likely to get more attention. If women don't reply, they're less likely to get attention... Tell me why that isn't fair?
Not only that, for me personally, I wouldn't spend time reading profiles and writing good messages to women who I don't expect a reply from - not because I don't think she's good... Simply because I'm on here for one thing and just like women, I don't have all the time in the world to do this! I'd target ones who have time to reply.
Anyway, I'm not going to explain again... As I said, each to their own. And also sh have decided, end of story.
Xxxxxx"But people wouldn't want bad reply scores as that would put others off messaging them. So they would in effect be penalised for being sent shitty 'wanna fuck' or 'hi' messages. How is that fair? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We tried this on another site ages ago. It made it worse not better because people felt obliged to reply, which we don't think is right. If someone doesn't reply just take it they're not interested and you'll enjoy the site more
Admin x
Have to say I agree, if I don't receive a reply then I know they're not interested, that's fine by me. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A couple of points here, we can receive over 100 emails in a day, if we reply to half of them and then they reply back thats is another 50 emails if we decide that only 25 of them are worth a second reply and they answer back. We will have received 175 emails but only answered 75. Our original percentage will have dropped from 50 percent to 40 percent in one day and so on until it looked like we only replay to a very few. God its way too late for maths, my head is spinning now lol "I was thinking something along those lines but couldn't be arsed to work it out. Well done you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Would it be a good idea, in the left sidebar, by where the verification summary is shown, to have another useful statistic - the %age of mails that the person(s) in the profile replies to and/or how many just remain permanently unopened? It might cast a light on who is serious and who are the time wasters. " So say I reply to every single message to say 'no thanks'...am I any more or less of a time waster? I'm still not meeting these people, and am sending a blanket reply to every message, but my stats show I reply, so what's the difference really between me replying to say no and deleting those I have no interest in...other than the increase in abuse I'll start to get again, and the reduced time I'll have to reply to those that I may actually want to meet? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If u not interested just say so. And the person can move on. Remember when you send something you want a response back. " do you realise how many messages couples get? most aint worthy of a reply as the sender didnt take time to read profiles. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In your profile it may be something that interests him to send a message and sometimes not answering back you might miss out out on a good person. " How would sending someone a "not interested" mail stop you from, in your words, "missing out"? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If u not interested just say so. And the person can move on. Remember when you send something you want a response back. " No reply = move on. Do you reply to every piece of paper that comes through your front door? "Dear Curry House, thank you so much for your unsolicited mail, on this occasion I fancy a pizza so no thanks"??? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Rather than "no of mails", I suggest "No of people blocked"! "Oddly enough the number of people I've felt the need to block has dropped dramatically since I stopped replying to all messages with a 'no thanks'...seems if you have to start a new message to send someone abuse rather than just hitting reply it's not worth the effort! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In your profile it may be something that interests him to send a message and sometimes not answering back you might miss out out on a good person. " we ask for guys 5'10 and over and get guys 5'7 messaging us! we say we meet in clubs or hotels so they message to say their free to accomodate! should we reply to these idiots? i think not | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If u not interested just say so. And the person can move on. Remember when you send something you want a response back. No reply = move on. Do you reply to every piece of paper that comes through your front door? "Dear Curry House, thank you so much for your unsolicited mail, on this occasion I fancy a pizza so no thanks"???" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry, but I totally disagree with the OP, for the reasons the above posters have mentioned. The more attractive the pics on a couple's/woman's profiles, the more mail they are going to receive. And the more likely it is that they are not going to have time to reply to most/all. A statistic of "% replied to" would most likely show that attractive couples are least likely to reply. But I think we already knew that, didn't we?" Yep..... Sunny you are the font of all knowledge as always ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Going off at a tangent, could the site not just put on a button that just replies to the sender "thanks for your interest but no thanks" and deletes the message. I personally don't mind if a person just deletes I can see that they are not interested and move on. It frustrates me when people read but don't delete or reply." That would only give way to people moaning about not getting a personal answer. As the site says take a no reply as a not interested. I personally would like to see the sent message box deleted then some wouldn't get so worked up about sent messages. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Going off at a tangent, could the site not just put on a button that just replies to the sender "thanks for your interest but no thanks" and deletes the message. I personally don't mind if a person just deletes I can see that they are not interested and move on. It frustrates me when people read but don't delete or reply." Why does it frustrate you? If you age getting any sort of stress from not getting a reply, you are investing too much emotional vulnerability into something that shouldn't have any. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!!
Because if you don't reply then it's not going to look great is it, all them people you would put off because your % of un replied mails is huge.
I certainly don't want to spend my time answering mail from people who haven't read my profile and I don't see why I should be penalised for it.
But its an accurate statistic. It's hardly a penalisation!
If I saw that a woman rarely replied, I wouldn't waste my time. Women who reply often, ill message. That's not penalising the woman is it? Simply allowing men to direct their attention better
If a woman doesn't reply often, she obviously doesn't appreciate/act on the messages as much as a woman who does reply. Men who send messages want an action, a reply of some sort...What's the problem with that?
"You are not allowing for the possibility that if a woman rarely replies it may be because she is very popular.. For example, when you upload new photos you get lots of new emails.. If a woman is getting 500 emails she can't possibly reply to all if them whereas one who gets 10 will have no problem have a 100% reply rate I have also stopped replying to people who have been on here for ages with no veris or picture.,as they are obviously time wasters..and some people you can tell they are obviously lying (usually they are a man pretending to be a woman or a couple!) so why should I get a bad statistic for not wanting to waste my time replying..they are wasting mine... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!! "Why does it, I only reply to those that bother to read my profile, and would think verifications show I'm real, don't see why, showing the percentage of messages I don't reply too helps, unless of course you guys want to work out how many idiots are on here that don't read profiles before messaging, because that's all a percentage on my profile will tell you ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Rather than "no of mails", I suggest "No of people blocked"! "And that makes a difference, how? I block numerous a day, usually men breaking chat rules by directing, makes me no less genuine. Jeez, use the site, message, no reply means not interested and move on | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Going off at a tangent, could the site not just put on a button that just replies to the sender "thanks for your interest but no thanks" and deletes the message. I personally don't mind if a person just deletes I can see that they are not interested and move on. It frustrates me when people read but don't delete or reply. That would only give way to people moaning about not getting a personal answer. As the site says take a no reply as a not interested. I personally would like to see the sent message box deleted then some wouldn't get so worked up about sent messages. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I can't see how a statistic like % of replies could make someone a time waster. Say a woman receives 100 messages in a day. She replies to 10 of those which gives her a stat of 10%. Of these she arranges 2 successful meets. Yet she only has a stat of 10%. Another receive one message in a day. Replies to it but no meet is arranged. Reoly reste of 100%. Is either a time waster? No because stats prove nothing "To quote Benjamin Disraeli "Lies, damned lies, and statistics". You can make them say whatever you want them to say, or interpret them anyway you want. if I send a message (rare nowadays) and don't get a rely, so be it.... its fab, I am a guy, I am old, I am not going to get many replies am I ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Divided opinions then...so, why not make the feature "switch off and onable"?
If you are proud of your stats, and want to display them you can do.
If feel that the truth may hurt, you can hide it.
For what it's worth, I don't have a problem with the deleted messages. At least the "hello" went to someone that did something with it. It's all the "people" who leave messages unopened that get up my nose. Chances are that the profiles are just there to waste everybody's time, and some form of a hint as to the chances of getting a reply would be appreciated.
"Like I said I would have a 100% reply rate. I also have filters on, so every bloke looking at my profile would get excited sit and formulate a decent message to get as far as sorry you cant send this message. How will that help frustration levels? What use would it be to anyone? As I said I know other females that get much more mail, that meet much more than I do, and yet their percentage would be so much lower than mine. How is that fair? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There is no problem with not replying to a message, what I think is truly rude is messages are not even read. If we put in the time to send a message it is polite for the recipient to read at least some of it. Howard." Again how do you know it hasn't been read? It takes a second to open it, so unless you were refreshing your sent box every second, you wont see it go unread/read/deleted Instead it just shows deleted. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There is no problem with not replying to a message, what I think is truly rude is messages are not even read. If we put in the time to send a message it is polite for the recipient to read at least some of it. Howard. Again how do you know it hasn't been read? It takes a second to open it, so unless you were refreshing your sent box every second, you wont see it go unread/read/deleted Instead it just shows deleted. "
On this...there is no difference to how a deleted message shows in the outbox...whether it was opened or not it still jut tells you it was deleted so how can you know if they read it or not before they hit the delete button? It may have taken 10 mins to write, but only 10 seconds to read and decide 'no'. Also some will look at the profile first...if they don't like something in the profile then they won't even read the message.
Instead of focusing on the outbox and those who haven't replied to you why not focus on the ones who have replied...you'll be so much happier!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally, I think its a good idea! It highlights those who don't reply. Why would it pressure people into replying? Wow, I can't believe I'm questioning the gods of the site!!!
Because people would feel the need to raise a statistic, that's generally pretty natural. Most people like a 100% statistic alongside their name. But if folk can't be bothered to read profiles or just bombard single women/couples with messages, who are the real time wasters?
Everyone who reads our profile gets a reply unless they keep messaging after we've attempted to end.
Everyone who doesn't read it, doesn't.
What about folk who get bombarded?? We had over 500 emails In our first 48 hours on the site, that equated to about 495 non replies. You can't reply to that number so does that make single women and couples fakes because starting on such negatives will leave a stat that will almost never rise over a few per cent?
Yes we get people who don't reply, live with it and ask yourself why, rather than attempting to raise a number so it looks as though others are the time wasters when, from our experience, it is usually the greater % of guys who fail to address the wants/needs/standards required by the people whose attention they're trying to gain.
Personally, I think you're reading too much into it. Ofcourse, people like 100% on their profile but the reply rate is exactly that... A reply rate.... Not a person rate... The best woman in the world may not reply to any messages at all. Thar doesn't make her a bad person. It simply implies that she doesnt reply to messages!
I'm sorry but that's just made me lol, in the eyes of some people on here that would make her a leper.
Lol, but seriously, surely a woman wouldn't be so conscious of her reply rate so as to feel under pressure?!?
I really think its a good idea. Allow me to explain.
A guy has 20 minutes free.
He finds two women he likes, reads their profiles ans writes good quality messages.
An hour later, she comes hoping to see a reply... Both messages have been read and deleted...
The next day... The guy doesn't bother reading profiles... Just sends 10 women a crappy 2 line message each....
An hour later.. bingo. Two replies in the same amount of time.
This may sound ridiculous but this is actually what happens.
Now if the women had good reply rates, the men wouldn't have to send shit messages, and actually, the quality of messages would enhance I think...Because then, all the attention goes to the repliers instead of sending crap messages to random women hoping for a reply.
I strongly feel this is a great idea!
Xxx
So if on Monday I get 50 messages and 49 of them say 'wanna fuck' or some other total crap so I just delete them. My reply rate is 1/50. Then joe blogs goes to send me a message which is a lovely message, we would be really compatible but he sees my 1/50 and thinks oh she's a miserable cow who never replies so he doesn't bother....
Who's losing out there?? I am, for not getting a good message off a decent chap. He is, because his opinion of me is skewed by a statistic that has been made to look rubbish by 49 idiots who can't be bothered to read a profile and write a alf decent message!
It's a terrible idea!"My thoughts exactly! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
