You're missing at least two things. Assuming (as is reasonable) that you're principally aiming at the heterosexual market, you face these issues:
1. Men and women are different. How do you address gender imbalances?
2. Not all women are equally appealing. How do you address attractive women being overwhelmed with male attention?
Some may object that I didn't include "attractive men" in #2. See #1. In particular, even the most attractive men are virtually never overwhelmed with female attention on online dating sites. (Those who are probably enjoy it.)
> In particular, even the most attractive men are virtually never overwhelmed with female attention on online dating sites. (Those who are probably enjoy it.)
This is really interesting if true (which I think it probably is) because real life is the opposite, at least if you measure by sexual partners: by definition, the average number of partners for men and women (in a heterosexual population) is the same, but it turns out that the variance for men is much larger; a few many get many women and most men get few, while most women get a typical number of men.
You've got the wrong metric. The reason some men have lots of sexual partners is because many men want lots of sexual partners, and some have the ability to do so. On the other hand, most women of even mediocre attractiveness can have lots of sexual partners, but fewer of them want to. This is just as you would expect based on the relative energy investment men and women make in producing offspring. Other animals with similar asymmetries in energy investment have similar sexual behavior to humans.
Incidentally, this observation puts the lie to the idea that having a stud/slut dichotomy is a "double standard". Having different standards for men and women makes sense; being a stud is hard, while being a slut is easy. Indeed, the vast majority of whining about "gender double standards" can be rebutted with the simple observation that men and women are different.
interesting. i've read studies on how men are much more likely to make a decision on an online profile based mainly upon the photo, whereas women care more about interests and other content. this is definitely something to consider. I do feel like the public Facebook profile gives women some interesting information - mutual friends, education, and basic interests are all there.
also, this is not principally aimed at heterosexuals - all orientations are welcome and i actually suspect that smaller groups like gay guys may find it more useful since these communities are smaller and filtering out current friends is more valuable.
You're missing at least two things. Assuming (as is reasonable) that you're principally aiming at the heterosexual market, you face these issues:
1. Men and women are different. How do you address gender imbalances?
2. Not all women are equally appealing. How do you address attractive women being overwhelmed with male attention?
Some may object that I didn't include "attractive men" in #2. See #1. In particular, even the most attractive men are virtually never overwhelmed with female attention on online dating sites. (Those who are probably enjoy it.)