![\"user-pic\"](\"/css/images/default.gif\")
Christian dating site spam
Ah, the funniest kind of spam.
Christian dating site spam
Ah, the funniest kind of spam.
I'm curious as to what exactly the \"Christian message\" that she finds disturbing actually is. That the site is specifically promoting long-term healthy relationships? Horror!
I can't say whether or not she's being punished for her status-- but I don't find it implausible to believe that people seeking long-term relationships don't want to be involved with a woman who is going through divorce proceedings.
I think a better case for L would be made for her to get her money back since they weren't able to are unable to accomplish their stated goals. In the mean time there are other dating websites that are advertised that may be more towards her specific demographic, for instance, momsmeetdads.com which caters towards single parents, I imagine many of which are in the same situation (thats one thats advertised on the radio I can't say anything personally about it).
I find the unhelpful valentines day spam from e-harmony a bit distasteful overall and that alone ought to be enough to demand money back as far as I'm concerned.
maybe she is turned off by lots of christianity's \"barefoot and pregnant\" message, especially coming from a group that also doesn't take time to offer and male searching for male or female searching for female option.
mrscolex: \"but I don't find it implausible to believe that people seeking long-term relationships don't want to be involved with a woman who is going through divorce proceedings.\"
To me the issue should be that other people signed up to eHarmony should be the ones to make that decision. Joe User does a search, finds L.D.'s profile, sees she is currently not-single-but-looking (or whatever) and makes the decision whether or not to proceed with anything. Instead, \"the system\" makes that determination for everyone involved...and moreover, makes that decision at the end of a seemingly long and tedious sign-up process (which is a pretty standard web no-no).
I've been on eHarmony for a couple months now and I have not received any \"Christian dating site spam\" or any other spam beyond the usual gross stuff which I can't attribute to eHarmony. As for the Christian mission of the founder, that may be the case but it seems they are quite open to all religions, letting you specify which religion you belong to (including the option for \"none\") and letting you specify which religions you're willing to accept in your matches.
eHarmony's mission, to me, seems to be matching people up for long-term commitments/marriages. It doesn't sound like L.D. is at that point in her life right now. Personally, I'd rather eHarmony kept their mission focused on the long-term matches than try to meet the needs of everyone.
I do have to agree that a better system would ask disqualifying questions up-front so as to not waste a person's time but with eHarmony you don't pay anything to take the survey so at least she's not out any dough.
First of all, as a modern, rational human being, I don't believe in Santa, The Easter Bunny, or The Big Imaginary Friend, and I find it offensive and primitive that gays are walled out -- even if that's what it means to some to be \"Christian.\"
I was given a free subscrip to e-Harmony early on (because I write a syndicated love/dating/sex/relationships column, and I think they were hoping I'd endorse it. No dice). I was matched with men who couldn't have been more wrong for me. I was shocked at how off-base they were. I suspect it's just another sales gimmick, this testing assurance.
I met my boyfriend in the Apple Computer store at the Grove. I suggest people who want to meet somebody do what the Europeans do: Go out in groups and be yourself and see if anybody bites. If you're a woman, be sure you forget what you learned in women's studies, and flirt your ass off. If you're a man, don't act like a pussy: Ask women out and make moves on them before they're too old to care.
Related to Internet dating, I heard a study presented at the Human Behavior & Evolution conference in Berlin a few years ago...by a woman from Max Planck Institute...Barbara Fasolo...who showed that, in Internet dating, too much choice causes people to make poor choices, and to be unhappy with their choices.
While the sites have changed considerably since I was on, three years ago, if they're still relatively the same, that would mean Matchmaker.com is one of the best, as it allows users to narrow down choices...very, very narrowly. But, I'm talking about tallness and age and profession and stuff like that.
Regarding eH's compatibility testing: Should the person you're with be exactly like you? My boyfriend and I are very, very happy, and we're quite different. Our values do mesh - but is that something you can tell from a dating questionnaire? It's stuff like the fact that he's rational that matters to me. I don't recall the things that are important to me (like that) being reflected in that questionnaire. Then again, I'm a modern, pro-science girl, so maybe the test only works for fundies who don't think too much. (And frankly, anybody who believes, entirely without evidence, in god, hasn't done their mental homework.)
If she's still available and wants to travel to Japan, I'll take her out on a Valentine's date! ;)
I'm unclear on the meaning of this sentence: \"To get the best results, she went through the humiliating process of revealing herself to the computer questionnaire with honesty.\"
Why would it be \"humiliating\" to answer questions about who you are and what you are looking for? Until there is some kind of e-telepathy, the software is going to need some kind of data to use in matching people together. The best way to get that is by asking the person questions.
Or were the questions somehow humiliating in how they were posed?
That said, I feel for her. I can imagine how upset I would be if a matching site told me that I was not eligible for their service simply because I was seperated from my partner.
L.D. told me she found it humiliating to reveal her full personal details while in the midst of the divorce. Think of some of the emotion such an experience might draw up.
L.D. told me she found it humiliating to reveal her full personal details while in the midst of the divorce. Think of some of the emotion such an experience might draw up.
Quite frankly then perhaps E-harmony nailed this one-- she's not quite ready for dating again yet if it truly is that humiliating that she can't \"relive\" those moments.
Quite frankly then perhaps E-harmony nailed this one-- she's not quite ready for dating again yet if it truly is that humiliating that she can't \"relive\" those moments.
Hear Hear mrscolex. You nailed it. No one wants to be a \"rebound\", especially from a relationship as serious as a marriage.
As for eHarmony discriminating against homosexual couples, who cares? That is not the demographic they wish to target currently. If I start a business making racquetball shoes exclusively, then am I discriminating against tennis players for not making tennis shoes as well? No, I am simply targeting a different market niche. Taking offense to niche marketing is silly and a waste of energy.
UPDATE: L.D. wrote in to say, \"Well! Those are some comments - just a point of clarification - I don't think the questions were humiliating, I was reacting to the online dating thang altogether. I guess it's a more accepted way to meet people then when I was coming up; it just feels a little weird to reach out through that channel.\"
I knew they seemed just a little too suspiciously wholesome.