Jun 5, 2010 2:57pm


We are very pleased to report that you are in the top half of OkCupid's most attractive users. The scales recently tipped in your favor, and we thought you'd like to know.

How can we say this with confidence? We've tracked click-thrus on your photo and analyzed other people's reactions to you in QuickMatch and Quiver.

. . .

Your new elite status comes with one important privilege:

You will now see more attractive people in your match results.

This new status won't affect your actual match percentages, which are still based purely on your answers and desired match's answers. But the people we recommend will be more attractive. Also! You'll be shown to more attractive people in their match results.

. . .

Suddenly, the world is your oyster. Login now and reap the rewards. And, no, we didn't just send this email to everyone on OkCupid. Go ask an ugly friend and see."

Is this legitimate?


Jun 5, 2010 3:09pm

Good question.

I hadn't considered the possibility that it was a fraudulent email.. yet.

Note the part where it reads:

...And, no, we didn't just send this email to everyone on OkCupid. Go ask an ugly friend and see.

It's not Okcupid's style to state such a thing, imo.


Jun 5, 2010 3:17pm

Yea, exactly. It sounds too shallow for an OKC email. So idk. But If anyone else got this, then I wouldn't attempt to sign on through the email's link.


Jun 5, 2010 8:53pm

The one I got said I'm the most attractive one here.


Jun 5, 2010 10:26pm

God of the blind indeed...


Jun 5, 2010 10:48pm

Fuck off whiner.


Jun 5, 2010 10:53pm



OP it was a bad idea to post that email with that link still active.  I WAS IN


icebreaker with you on video games and another who messaged you. 

His profile name is mmmk19.  I had to relog in to post this message.  IF



Jun 5, 2010 11:21pm

Haha, you pwned yourself.  The e-mail is authentic, and so it the auto-log-in link it came with.

And the irreverent style of it is typically OkCupid.

If you change your password, the link will probably not work any more.


Jun 6, 2010 12:03am

Unfortunately the links continue to work even after you've changed your password, unfortunately the OP would probably be best deleting their account and starting afresh.


Jun 9, 2010 4:29am

Hey all, We've recently fixed this problem.  If  you change your PW, it should invalidate all authlinks generated since 6/1/10, or thereabouts.  Let me know if you still see issues... Max


Jun 9, 2010 4:35am

Do you mean 1/6/2010?


Jun 10, 2010 10:08am

I also received an email like the OP did.  I just ignored it and deleted.  Never crossed my mind it might be spam.


Jun 10, 2010 6:06pm


mnk77 wrote:   Hey all, We've recently fixed this problem. If you change your PW, it should invalidate all authlinks generated since 6/1/10, or thereabouts. Let me know if you still see issues... Max


ChameleonDave wrote:   Do you mean 1/6/2010?


He means 2010-06-01, ie June 1st 2010.

The authlinks already expire after a certain amount of time, they are working towards making a PW change invalidate all the currently usable ones. (An extremely welcome change, I might add)



Jun 11, 2010 6:06am

What I'm wondering is who made the call? I haven't encountered any form of rating here based purely on looks. Also, I don't understand why they would want to call half of their userbase ugly. I get that it's tongue-in-cheek, but it still seems harsh.


Jun 11, 2010 8:15am

Bitch Magazine is talking about this:


The whole thing seems quite uncool.


Jun 14, 2010 12:58am

Several recent things done by the management have been extremely uncool.  I got one of these emails on the old account the day before I discovered (or was implemented) the 'what I'm seeking for' feature on profiles which prompted me to close the account.

-- Yes, still pissed about that Aki


Jun 14, 2010 3:21am

This isn't that exciting. Sure, this new algorithm lops the ugliest 50% of people off my homepage (and me off of theirs, I presume), but it still leaves the other 47% whose appearance would prevent me from ever contacting them or replying to a message from them. So whereas I previously found passably attractive one in maybe forty male users who message me, now I'll find one in every twenty who doesn't automatically get discarded. Whoopty freakin' doo. What they need to do is tier this even further and match the top quarter with like.

Bring on the "shallow bitch" stuff. I should be given the option to have the system discriminate on appearance for me if I want it to, if this site aims to be truly comprehensive. What some, like the Bitch magazine chick, are saying is that OKC should NOT give us that option and should force us to be good, altruistic, egalitarian daters whether we want to or not... "Mother knows best, so eat your porridge; it tastes like crap but you'll eat it because it's good for you." So is sushi, mom, except it tastes great. I'll stick to my sushi.

I think the only people who can be angry at this are the unattractive who will now not have their profiles shoved in more attractive people's faces, as if OKC is depriving them of that golden opportunity to catch the eye of a model who loves them for their big heart and run off into the sunset together. Sorry, guy/gal, but it just wasn't gonna happen anyway. All this does is speed up an inevitable process.


Jun 14, 2010 4:47pm

Ok, I'm not a mod, but I want to clear up some misconceptions about the 'attractive' feature

1) It's based on looks. This is only half right, as the email indicates it's based on photo click-thru's (how many people visited your page based on your picture), and quickmatch scores. So if you have a good profile, and a decent picture, you will most likely get this email

2) 'Ugly' people will not be able to see 'attractive' people. Not true. The match percentages are unchanged by this feature. If you match a person 98%, they will be your top match regardless of their 'attractiveness' and you both will show up in the match search. The only things this system affects are the recommended matches on the home page (and little side tab) as well as the quiver.

3) This probably won't change much. My understanding of the situation (which I admit is limited) is that this is a feature rewarding having an active profile. If you update frequently with photos, and edits, you will be boosted to the front page, get more photo click-thru's etc. If you maintain and keep an active profile, plus you frequently message others, and have an open ice breakers, it seems like you'll get whatever this thing offers, otherwise you'll more likely be recommended people with less active profiles.

All that's left that I have to say is that I hope a mod gets here soon and clears some of this up


Jun 16, 2010 9:45am

So this affects the people that you see in that scrolling banner thingy that you get on your home page? I could be wrong but I think it does. I think I'm definitely getting less attractive people in that (I say less attractive but what I really mean is average looking). I'm fine with the fact that OKcupid has put me on team ugly, I can cope with that, but I would like to see some good looking people up there, too! I don't appreciate reality rudely interrupting my pointless day dreaming. Although some good looking people do slip through the system I feel like Okcupid is gently prodding me to message people more of my own level of attractiveness, which is not going to happen. Mostly because messaging anyone here is such a terrifying prospect to me that it's something that I'm never going to, regardless of attractiveness. But that's besides the point and nevertheless, I don't appreciate this. It's bollocks.

Also, I'd like to know if the system makes distinctions based on what you are looking for (friends Vs dating). Does it take that into account when making home page suggestions? I know this is mainly a dating website but it's something to consider.


Jun 16, 2010 7:32pm

There are definitely considerations made based on profile characteristics.

If ie you select in your profile's "looking for" section" only "long-term dating", and if there are two otherwise compatible dating prospects, candidate A has selected "casual sex" and candidate B has selected "long-term dating", the system is much more likely to suggest candidate B as a match (or in Quiver, Quickmatch or homescreen "profiles you might like" etc) than it would suggest person A.

Post a comment