|
Pyramus -> RE: The Real and the Fake (3/15/2013 9:39:48 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: curioushusband
I guess I am curious as to what you all think about the legitimacy factor of the people on here.
You'll get different answers depending on a variety of factors.
For example, any woman NOT looking for a partner will have a wholly different take on how to handle the fakes than any older man seeking, say, an 18-year old willing submissive. Likewise, most women will have many men contacting them around the clock, while most men will have to feverishly hunt or they'll perish of boredom (ask me how I know). In addition, those truly seeking real time relationships versus those content in online banter will also likely have a wholly different take on the fakes.
Therefore, my answer below is only for those actively seeking a partner ...
For example, I have a working "system", which is labor intensive, I readily admit - but, to answer your question, it works for me.
a) I first run "my" basic search (the criteria would obviously be different for each of us);
b) I then HIDE all the fakes or wastes of time that can instantly be gleaned without any overt thinking;
c) Time permitting, I begin to read the profiles of the very few which are left (perhaps 5% to 10% of the original list);
d) For the extremely few (perhaps 10% of the few that were left), I may send a personal message;
e) At that point, normal rules of social interaction apply, which means most of those peter out, unfortunately, after a few short interactions;
f) Luckily, the forum, unilateral at worst, and interactive at best, is what's left. :)
This weeding-out approach can work for anyone, so I simply show an EXAMPLE set of criteria, for illustrative purposes, below:
Note: YOUR selection criteria WILL be different; yet, the algorithmic process 'can' be the same.
1. I run the standard search at ONLY 5 miles radius (e.g., submissive or switch, age 40-99, weight <160, looking for dominant men, sorted by last on, etc.).
2. I open all OLD profiles (defined as last logged in 2011 or earlier) and press the HIDE button for every single one, en masse.
3. For those with pictures that are left, I right click the profile photo to instantly determine which are fake profile pictures intended to deceive you (this step is required because the vast majority of profile photos are NOT of the person depicted in the profile, despite the innocent looking nature of many of them (we're not counting those clearly intended to be artistic renditions). Beware, most people will tell you they can intuitively recognize a fake profile photo and, guess what? They can. For the obvious ones! Hell, anyone can. It's the vast majority of mundane fakes that you don't want to waste your time with that this process weeds out efficiently. Trust me, I'm as good with computers as anyone, and even I was absolutely amazed, at first, at what technology will find out in a split second about any profile photo nowadays). Note: You can also find on collarmefakes.com many of the obvious fake profile pictures, for San Jose, anyway. No other region is well characterized though (ask me how I know). :)
4. At this point, you've weeded perhaps 200 profiles down to (often far) fewer than a dozen. Only now is it worth your time to actually READ & EXPLORE the profiles (bearing in mind that about 5% of the profiles that are left will be of any interest to you, or, more importantly, will have a chance that THEY will take an interest in you). Of what's left, I often weed out a few more out of hand (e.g., any mention whatsoever of money, or those that are just too good to be true, because, in general, nothing is that good in life except a guy on the other end writing exactly what guys want to hear). I've had some respond with chat requests, but then when I run the obligatory Spokeo check, I find their email registered to a guy on Facebook - so there are still a few dozen 'checks' you 'can' make, if you're computer saavy (but I leave them out here for this is already far too descriptive a response).
5. I'll let you decide how to proceed from here, but a classic move would be to check their forum posts (scammers don't post on the forums); read their journal; and follow all links in their journal entries (some are absolutely enlightening!). After doing so, write to them, posting SOMETHING about their profile that shows you have read it, and, for heaven's sake, write something intelligent. It turns out, just as it is in the real world when you approach someone you've never met before, it matters less what you say than the fact that it simply be coherent. The fact of the matter is, the truth will be in her response. If she disses you versus if she replies just as intelligently will make ALL of the difference. As of this point, all natural rules of relationships and friendships apply.
6. Since this step really leaves you with only one or two out of hundreds who initially show up, and who responded positively to your enlightened queries, and who might be interested in you ... your next logical step might be to double the search radius from 5 miles to 10 miles. Bear in mind that doubling the radius quadruples the hit count (which is a huge burden on your weeding out method).
Luckily for me, my search criteria includes the word 'married' in the profile, half of which are people NOT looking for those who are married - so, for me, even at the maximum practical search of 25 miles, the final tally is about 2 or 3 women, in an area including two of the ten largest cities in the United States, worth my energy to even bother to attempt to converse with. Those very few of you who have conversed with me, know what I'm talking about.
As an aside ... Heaven forbid the poor aging bloke seeking his younger-than-30-year-old submissive waif just dying to be his kinky sex slave, with his radius set to something on the order of the size of a state. There isn't enough time in his lifetime for him to weed out the obvious fakes given that unwelcome quest.
Note: As my first sentence indicates, a LOT depends on WHOM you are looking for (and, if you're even looking), and who YOU are (females having an entirely different experience than makes). For example, 99.99999% of all lesbian bixesual submissive females under about the age of 30 and under about 150 pounds are nearly guaranteed to be fake, just from the start ... but social profiling is a task wholly different - which I don't handle using the methods above.
DISCLAIMER: A lot of people will say this process is too much work - but - they don't understand the inherent efficiency of computers - and - they're not 50-year old married men looking for a relationship with a 'real' romantic submissive who lives close enough to make it work and who wants a reciprocal relationship given the circumstances. Stand in another man's shoes ...
|
|
|
|
