I know it sounds Black Mirror-ish, but if it would penalize rude guys, it would be a win for everyone (incentive + filtering + hetero-women more interested in using this app.)
It's the "downvote for disagreement" problem.
Sentiment analysis or event a simpler solution - requires to highlight a sentence. In virtually all abusive messages showed by female friends of mines, it was plain obvious.
But there already is a report button on Tinder...
I am certain Bumble searches the text for phone numbers and if when girls start giving you theirs, your profile gets shown to the whole city.
Lewd assholes are fine, lewd assholes behind masks are dangerous.
Reminds me of /r/tinder lambasting some guy's Tinder bio because he was specific about what he wanted. He wanted a woman who would cook and clean for him, something like that.
Yes, easy to make fun of (virtue signaling is always tempting), but I don't see the problem. That kind of bio works out perfectly for everyone: the man gets what he wants, and women know of his expectations before they even interact with him. It's ideal.
What people don't want to acknowledge is that the default is to hide our expectations and instead engage in some form of manipulation or leak them out down the road. And that's the problem. Not some guy being upfront about them.
Like you said, it's better to be able to filter someone immediately than deal with sleeper/masked issues down the line.
That said, i am rich + no college + good looks.
Rudeness isn't a problem if you've things working in your favour. That said, i am trying to improve as a person so that others have their pleasant day as well.
That title makes no sense at all. Whether or not a message is creepy has nothing to do with the content of the message and everything to do with the recipient’s perception—namely does the recipient find the sender attractive? It’s impossible for an person who is attractive to the recipient to send a “creepy” message, because it will not be perceived as such.
As a woman, this is completely false. "Creepy" doesn't mean "ugly," it means makes me feel unsafe or threatened. I don't care how hot you are, if you give off rapist/murderer vibes, you're a creep. I have met hot guys who were creepy.
He isn't only talking about physical attraction but attraction as in having a crush on someone or finding them lot attractive.
Think about it, if you get a date with your crush, would you think like, oh he might rape me? No such thought doesn't come to us when we are attracted to someone.
I can show you screenshot of conversations in which women enjoy my obscene messages.
It differs for every girl but what you are saying is not more "normal" than what Ryandrake is saying.
What's creepy is a subjective thing.
There is no thing Universally Creepy.
If a send a dick pic to a girl who had crush on me, is it creepy? She might not agree with you, I've tried :)
The girls who are interested in me. I do ask them if they want my nude pics? After realising that i am non judgemental open minded guy, they do tell me that they want nudes.
Yea, a few also got offended but i considered them to be feminist kind.
I believe sexual desires are nothing to hide. It's better to display your desire for others with all honesty.
If they say no, swiftly go back. No need to pester anyone.
If you register an account as the opposite sex it is incredibly informative. Women essentially swamped with matches. They ignore everyone but the few they want to talk to. Men basically swipe right on everyone, there's no point on making a choice because women have the real choice.
It's fascinating how a symmetric system can turn so asymmetric so quickly.
Plus, all ratings are average. If you are rude to 50% people, it is more than being rude to 5% (maybe actually misunderstanding)%.
That’s even without considering that people won’t review fairly, and will abuse such a system and the new power they get by having a higher rank than others.
You know the message of the Nosedive episode of Black Mirror was that such systems would be a dystopia rather than a “win for everyone,” right?
The episode’s point included the idea well-intentioned social system engineering can backfire, which is a well accepted trueism in the social sciences. And your refutation is basically as long as women don’t have to see anything they don’t like, it’s worth it.
Everybody there was acting perfectly predictably, and rationally, and the consequences for the behavior displayed were eerily similar to what they would have been without all the technological pomp.
The technology winds up simply making the normal progression of the events of life happen just a bit faster. Hard working, social people that you would expect to be successful still become successful, and entitled people like the protagonist of the episode has that entitlement drawn out far more quickly than we would ordinarily see.
There's no dystopia, just unfamiliarity with the setting that the show exploits to dramatic effect to make you think it's dystopia. But if the world of Black Mirror is dystopic, then you can level the same charge at today's technological milieu, and yesterday's, all the way back to sharpened sticks and stones. Technology doesn't destroy our humanity, it amplifies it.
Real dystopic fiction, like 1984 or A Clockwork Orange, is dystopic because it magnifies the human selfish instinct such that it turns into the villain of the story. But Black Mirror contains no grand villain, just plain old ordinary drama. The characters fight each other, not an immense system that's hellbent on destroying human dignity.
They're fairly contemptuous of it, safe in the understanding that they can simply ignore it and so long as they don't have a utter meltdown, they'll be fine. You don't see ordinary people having meltdowns, and even today the meltdown that landed Lacie in jail can ruin anyone's life.
Lacie truly brought it all on herself.