spiritlescalier

Mar 15

Right now there's "unimportant," "a little important," and "very important."  I think it would be handy to have "dealbreaker" as well (in the drop-down filter, too), so that people can very quickly tell that this person who is a 94% match, and who has answered 3284 questions, really isn't going to work.

Marin8ed4u

Mar 15

There used to be a "Mandatory" field, but they had to change it to make space for newer features.  Those questions are now searchable for A-listers looking for specific answers.  Keep in mind that the developers try to make sure that most, if not all, of the features on the mobile apps work the same or similar as the web interface.

diatribein

Mar 15

'had to change...'  They didn't have to change anything. They decided to downgrade the experience of web users by replacing check boxes/buttons with graphics heavy, ugly space consuming selection mechanisms that are equally annoying for web users as people using the site on mobile devices. Functionality and general usability are victims of these "upgrades".

You are indeed correct in saying that 'the developers (at OKcupid) try to make sure that most, if not all, of the features on the mobile apps work the same or similar as the web interface', but it would be more correct to state that: Rather than keep a more robust experience for web users and have mobile users get a more simplified version of the site, as designers with good practices are accustom to doing, the designers employed here have taken the radical step of downgrading the experience of web users in order to match the experience on the mobile app. I am guessing they are not fans of the concept of graceful degradation.

 

My main point though is that none of this "had" to happen. It wasn't some inevitable destiny of progress. The Mandatory category didn't have to be eliminated. It was a conscious choice by the idiot developers employed here. A better choice would have been to leave the match questions as they were. It was working great before they decided to interfere with them.

ohmagoor

Mar 16

Eh, is "make space for newer features" a new meme (or rather: running gag)? The only thing I see is features are constantly removed or crippled. The reduced number of choices for question is yet another one.


As I'd written before: In spite of all annoying changes, the OKC folks have to pay their bills and so I'm considering going A-List, at least for a while, or contribute in another way. However, doing this right now sends the signal I acknowledge the feature degradation we've seen in the past year. That's not what I'd want to do.

AirCupid

Mar 25

I miss the "mandatory" option as well and find "dealbreaker" a much better expression! When I find myself sharing a high match score with someone I will check the base of questions in common first and then "jump" to the unacceptable answers. There are some dealbreakers for me that would not make up for a 99,5 % match (the highest I have here according to staff robot).

Now, I have a question relating to a change in the question-area, too. The opposite of dealbreaker so to speak.

My question is: the meaning of the new option "any of the above"? English is not my mother tongue and that's why I am - seriously - asking: What does it mean? Is it the same as "all of the above" - which very often does not make sense in my eyes for the answers are really black and white. Or does it mean "none of the above" matches my stance?

An answer will be very appreciated

AC

BiggestCockEver

Mar 26

"Any of the above" means all answers are acceptable to you.

AirCupid

Mar 26

Thanks for the answer! Then it does not make sense to me. "None of the above" would when I find myself eye-rolling with the options not matching my opinion. (I am not taking it half as seriously as I sound, though ^^) As long as they won't downgrade/extinguish the possibility to comment underneath the check-boxes... and/or the display of unacceptable answers...

BiggestCockEver

Mar 26

I should have said:
"Any of the above" means all answers are equally acceptable to you. Which can also mean "equally unacceptable". When you choose "Any of the above" it says below that you have marked the question "Irrelevant".

So it also means "none of the above". Choosing "Any of the above" means the question should not influence your match percentages.

Whether you like all of the answer choices, or none of them, choosing "All of the above" says that it is a pointless question for you. How anyone answers is not going to affect how good of a match they are for you. I consider "All of the above" as a way to "Skip" the question without having to be shown it again when I go to answer "New" questions.

Plus you do have the opportunity to add comments, if you want, about why you consider the question, or the choices of answers it provides, to be irrelevant.

AirCupid

Mar 26

Aaah! Now I got it 😁 Thx again!

 

ohmagoor

Mar 26

"None of the above" is rather "All answers su...are annoying". And yes, I'd like to have that every now and then :-)

By the way, "mandatory" hasn't vanished entirely. It's still there If you know where to look.

Neequxsan

Mar 26

By the way, "mandatory" hasn't vanished entirely. It's still there If you know where to look.

Well, yes, it is called 'very' now.  "Very" has taken the '1' code, with 'a little' and 'somewhat' taking 3 and 4.   The only one that is actually 'gone' is 2, so the old 'very'.

spiritlescalier

Mar 26

ohmagoor wrote:

By the way, "mandatory" hasn't vanished entirely. It's still there If you know where to look.

Inquiring minds want to know!

And, to AirCupid, I do the same thing--read the profile and the details, then jump to unacceptable answers and cull through to find my personal dealbreakers.  Having those separated out would save a LOT of time.

etherflan

Mar 26

I do the same thing--read the profile and the details, then jump to unacceptable answers and cull through to find my personal dealbreakers. 

I feel the same way. I don't ever want kids but get tons of 97% matches for people who want 3-4 and find my answer of none unacceptable.

AirCupid

Mar 26

Does OkC ever read these feedbacks (1) and (2) care about? Has anything the (visible) community liked back desperately been changed back? Just seriously wondering.

@spirit (a bit OT)
Do you remember the feature of editing other's profiles? (I had never used it.) Your first self-summeray sentence tempted me to write something between the brackets ^^ 

@ether
I have never seen the number of kids someone wants. For me it's (mostly) a dealbreaker when all those 50-something guys want their first kids. Without judging - I do not like the "I will leave all doors open" attitude in their age-ranges (35-50something). That has turned out one of my biggest turnoffs. And there are so few guys including my age without the might-want-a-baby-desire. Geez. @oh
In spite of all annoying changes, the OKC folks have to pay their bills and so I'm considering going A-List, at least for a while, or contribute in another way. However, doing this right now sends the signal I acknowledge the feature degradation we've seen in the past year. That's not what I'd want to do.

@oh

"In spite of all annoying changes, the OKC folks have to pay their bills and so I'm considering going A-List, at least for a while, or contribute in another way. However, doing this right now sends the signal I acknowledge the feature degradation we've seen in the past year. That's not what I'd want to do."

I share this attitude. It is the wrong time now. Especially because changes are not communicated. Each and every time I have to find my own way through. That's tiring. Still, this is the only site I stayed. Any other I tried - free or not - made me run away, screaming!

Neequxsan

Mar 27

Does OkC ever read these feedbacks (1) and (2) care about? Has anything the (visible) community liked back desperately been changed back? Just seriously wondering.

Sending a feedback message via comments is more effective. OKC devs used to participate in the forums, but I have not seen any (at least any who identify as one) in quite some time.

Which is not surprising.  Forums where users and developers interact were something companies were really excited about a few years back, but it soured pretty quickly and has fallen out of fashion, mostly because it ends up being a miserable experience for the devs.

At this point the forums are pretty much all-user, and probably only because no other changes in the site have broken them yet and removing them takes resources.  As soon as some change requires putting time into making the forums work with it, they will probably go away.

Just like the old 'flag thread' button, they are a bit of a placebo.

Professor712

Mar 27

With my experience and knowledge of showing people about match questions - you have to understand that in order for the match % to help search through good and bad matches you can only do so many questions at "very important" before it gives you constantly bad results. The kind of results when many people are 90% match and above and they have some deal-breakers with you.

The match % is determined by point value - if you put too many questions as very important - any question not answered correctly only loses 1 or 2% instead of the usual 20-30%.

The problem with a "deal-breaker" option is that if you limit your "very important" answers to 5 per 100 questions answered you don't need it and everything works properly. And the rest are either answered as somewhat important or a little important. Anybody who answers your match questions honestly and completely will end up with a fair accurate picture of your match % with them. Any very important question not answered correctly would knock 20-25% off their match % with you. Instead of the typical 1-5% because that person overused "very important" for everything.

Plus, when "mandatory" was used not too long ago - people just kept over using it making it worthless and complaining about a need for a deal-breaker option when if they just used it properly there was no need for one. The point value of those were so high - 1 incorrect answer in that category was a huge and obvious hit to match %.

A warning about match questions - Incorrect results can also happen if the other person didn't answer enough questions with you or they didn't answer anything high in importance. A lot of people lately are not answering enough match questions to get a good picture of them. But, OkCupid has corrected to allow match % to be done more accurate with less questions answered.

Any other questions?

 

AirCupid

Mar 27

Talking about scores. There is a pretty interesting observation I have made influencing the Enemy-score of many, many guys (and thus all women out there). Even if a woman thinks these scores themselves are mandatory or dealbreaking... it's always worth a look if the guy seems interesting... Be-cause: So often it happens that "he" has defined his own answer "unacceptable" in his opposites. Have no clue (1) why they do it and (2), moreover, how they can not realize it. Maybe the cursor jumps by accident?

In the past I have told some of them about it. I stopped that because the men here ignore you whatever you write and why should I care if "he" misses his match by being so unaware 😎. (Okay, that was judging, take it back ;p).

Only the true Enemies are good Enemies. Who needs fake Enemies anyway?! I don't. You?

Professor712

Mar 27

AirCupid, both sides do it - I think it is mostly accidental because many of the answers heavily conflict with their answers and other parts of their profile, for example questions such as "Do you smoke?" I might find someone who is a big health fanatic in their profile put "No", but allow answers such as "Yes", but not allow the answer "No". In this case I would serious doubt the person actually meant to put "No", but rushed through the questions and didn't double check.

I have been here for a long time and helped out for almost all of that time (furthermore, I have read something like a million profiles on OkCupid and their questions, personalities, etc in all those years) - I almost never see it for anything that you could really have a reason for the conflict in answers.

I think a lot of those people are the rare types online who don't look for a person who is very much like them or have a lot in common with them.

 

My Comments on that -

Many people I have seen want many of their answers and profiles to be alike with a significant other. I am not talking about liking similar movies, similar books, or similar tv shows; I am talking about the people who want another person who is a complete match to them in everything.

The problem with that in dating is if you try to find someone that very much like you in interests - unless you are absolutely in love with everything about them beyond physical attraction. The relationship can collapse when things get too mundane or when you didn't invest much in the relationship to make it last when things get tough (It is very hard to invest when everything is in common with the other person). If there is differences between you and the other - there is investment in the relationship you have to put in to make it work because of those differences. You don't just have things in common and looks holding the relationship together, and the relationship doesn't get very boring, or fall apart when one person changes their mind about something insignificant.

I think a lot of relationships today fail because of the Narcissus (Narcissus was a Greek myth in which a Guy fell in love with himself and died because of his obsession with himself) mentality that people have for dating now by looking for almost complete matches of themselves and dump people over the slightest difference. This is all for a high risk of a relationship that will get boring fast or will fall apart over something stupid if you do succeed in finding it.

I can understand people get a lot of options online, but one of the worst ways is to try to find someone too much similar to you.

AirCupid

Mar 27

Uhm, @prof, not quite sure whether I expressed myself properly? (I am German after all ^^) What I meant was this: I see a guy in the gallery and am interested to read his profile. Then I see he and I share a high Enemy score. I look at the "unacceptable answers" and realize: Hey, I have clicked I am interested in "Love" over "Sex". He has clicked that as well. So my "Love" is displayed in red letters (because he defined it unacceptable), his is in black letters. Thus he creates an Enemy percentage score where there is no difference at all in the answer. Some guys share a whole bunch of identical answers they defined "wrongly" though.

As for my part I am open to differences and variety yet I also have some dealbreakers. I am laughing about much of the "unacceptable" stuff yet am darn serious about other issues.

I agree with your thoughts on narcissism. Big human fastfood mentality as I perceive it.

Am dreaming of a filter to see only those guys who solely clicked "long term dating" plus "anywhere". (Not sure whether the A-members have that filter.) That does not protect from liars, of course. Yet I do not have to read all those profiles that aren't a match in the first place... By now I jump down to the what is he looking for area first...

:)

Professor712

Mar 27

AirCupid, I understood what you were saying - you have answers that are incorrect when the other person answered the same thing as you. In my experience, that is usually an error on their part when selecting what they define is acceptable answers caused by answering a whole bunch of questions really fast and not double checking the answers. 

In other words - you should have a higher match % and a lower enemy % with that person.

Laughs at fast-food mentality - that is sure the mentality of today.

 

There is a filter for long-term dating only and everyone has access to that filter. It is found under "Advanced" and then click "looking for..." and select "long-term-dating". And, you can select "Anywhere" just by changing the distance it searches.  

 

Post a comment

Add a photo to:

Stay fresh with Instagram

Are you sure you want to delete this album?

Where's your photo?

Drop it like it’s hot

Photos must be at least 400 x 400px
Edit thumbnail
Add a caption

You look fantastic!