Post: #26

"They bring in a post-wall "douchebag expert" "

I almost died laughing, brilliant

Post: #27

(10-12-2017 08:06 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  With so many women hitting the wall and becoming utterly bitter about becoming sexually invisible it makes sense for Tinder to transition at least partially to a hate-mill.

Titanic hits iceberg? "NOW FEATURING INDOOR SWIMMING POOL!"

In time they can turn the app into a simple program that randomises alpha male suitors but there's no option to swipe right, only left, allowing these sad old hags to at least pretend that their shit is still top notch.

I've thought about that. It's completely pointless and unproductive that men should have to swipe at all on thousands of profiles. Men should get fed all of the "yes" swipes on them into a separate inbox where they then decide whether or not to confirm the match. Then a notification is sent to the girl if the match is confirmed. That would actually make apps worth the time for every man because they level the playing field for men with time investment. Once the initial time investment is made in building a profile, its hands off until you get any notifications.

If the girls are the only ones doing the selective swiping, then let them do all the work in screening themselves into the guy's frame. When they realize they aim too high and aren't getting any matches, maybe they will lower their standards to a more reasonable level, making the online experience better for everyone. Every dating site/app should make the girl put some investment into the interaction before any conversation or match is initiated.

This quickly kills their fantasy that every woman can get a 10/10 male online, because most women who only swipe on those top tier men will be left out in the cold, then will re-assess their standards accordingly, making the app worthwhile for a much higher percentage of men. That is probably the biggest thing that has killed these apps over time.

Post: #28

(10-12-2017 09:04 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 08:06 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  With so many women hitting the wall and becoming utterly bitter about becoming sexually invisible it makes sense for Tinder to transition at least partially to a hate-mill.

Titanic hits iceberg? "NOW FEATURING INDOOR SWIMMING POOL!"

In time they can turn the app into a simple program that randomises alpha male suitors but there's no option to swipe right, only left, allowing these sad old hags to at least pretend that their shit is still top notch.

I've thought about that. It's completely pointless and unproductive that men should have to swipe at all on thousands of profiles. Men should get fed all of the "yes" swipes on them into a separate inbox where they then decide whether or not to confirm the match. Then a notification is sent to the girl if the match is confirmed. That would actually make apps worth the time for every man because they level the playing field for men with time investment. Once the initial time investment is made in building a profile, its hands off until you get any notifications.

If the girls are the only ones doing the selective swiping, then let them do all the work in screening themselves into the guy's frame. When they realize they aim too high and aren't getting any matches, maybe they will lower their standards to a more reasonable level, making the online experience better for everyone.

Isnt this kinda what bumble is?

Post: #29

(10-12-2017 09:08 PM)Steve McQueen Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 09:04 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 08:06 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  With so many women hitting the wall and becoming utterly bitter about becoming sexually invisible it makes sense for Tinder to transition at least partially to a hate-mill.

Titanic hits iceberg? "NOW FEATURING INDOOR SWIMMING POOL!"

In time they can turn the app into a simple program that randomises alpha male suitors but there's no option to swipe right, only left, allowing these sad old hags to at least pretend that their shit is still top notch.

I've thought about that. It's completely pointless and unproductive that men should have to swipe at all on thousands of profiles. Men should get fed all of the "yes" swipes on them into a separate inbox where they then decide whether or not to confirm the match. Then a notification is sent to the girl if the match is confirmed. That would actually make apps worth the time for every man because they level the playing field for men with time investment. Once the initial time investment is made in building a profile, its hands off until you get any notifications.

If the girls are the only ones doing the selective swiping, then let them do all the work in screening themselves into the guy's frame. When they realize they aim too high and aren't getting any matches, maybe they will lower their standards to a more reasonable level, making the online experience better for everyone.

Isnt this kinda what bumble is?

It's a better format than tinder but still not ideal IMO. Guys still have to swipe on every profile in the stack. In my idea, the guys would only see profiles when a girl swiped right on them. Otherwise they would see no profiles.

This way it also eliminates girls who are just using apps like tinder to promote their IG or snapchat for attention whoring because guys would never see their profiles in the first place unless they swiped right on the guy. I guess you could couple that with making the girl initiate within 24 hrs like bumble to further weed out some of the attention whores and self promoters.

The point is don't reward them with the dopamine hit that a match brings until the guy has done the second screen, because all these excessive matches do is gas up the girl and make 6's think they are 10's when 95% of guys are swiping right on every girl.

It changes their mindset from the current "will I swipe on this guy?" to "will this guy swipe on me?". The latter is the frame you want the girl to be in when they are using these apps. Sure, they can go into the app when they first use it with the "will I swipe on this guy?" mindset but when they fail to get the matches they expect, their ego will start to get hit and the standards will lower, and they will re-frame to "will this guy swipe on me?". This is when guys who are well put together but not necessarily top tier (top 40% or so) will reap much higher rewards than the existing format. But in a way I kind of fear this could go wrong in that all it would do is re-distribute the remainder of the women not occupied by the top 5% to the next 10% instead of the next 35% which would be the goal.

Post: #30

The part from 0:25-40 or so, when the alpha bitch walks in the room, is most telling. Everybody reacting in awe to her, begging to serve her whims. It's pure white-collar careertrix porn. This is what Tinder's target women aspire to: surrounded by obsequious beta herbs and smiling female peers who inwardly seethe at jealousy at her superiority. It's status with a thin veneer of achievement and power, but actually based on the most superficial justification. The careertrix doesn't really care about achieving or getting stuff done the way a man does, she just wants to look good pretending to do it.

New boots, same old worn-out puss.

Post: #31

(10-12-2017 09:22 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 09:08 PM)Steve McQueen Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 09:04 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 08:06 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  With so many women hitting the wall and becoming utterly bitter about becoming sexually invisible it makes sense for Tinder to transition at least partially to a hate-mill.

Titanic hits iceberg? "NOW FEATURING INDOOR SWIMMING POOL!"

In time they can turn the app into a simple program that randomises alpha male suitors but there's no option to swipe right, only left, allowing these sad old hags to at least pretend that their shit is still top notch.

I've thought about that. It's completely pointless and unproductive that men should have to swipe at all on thousands of profiles. Men should get fed all of the "yes" swipes on them into a separate inbox where they then decide whether or not to confirm the match. Then a notification is sent to the girl if the match is confirmed. That would actually make apps worth the time for every man because they level the playing field for men with time investment. Once the initial time investment is made in building a profile, its hands off until you get any notifications.

If the girls are the only ones doing the selective swiping, then let them do all the work in screening themselves into the guy's frame. When they realize they aim too high and aren't getting any matches, maybe they will lower their standards to a more reasonable level, making the online experience better for everyone.

Isnt this kinda what bumble is?

It's a better format than tinder but still not ideal IMO. Guys still have to swipe on every profile in the stack. In my idea, the guys would only see profiles when a girl swiped right on them. Otherwise they would see no profiles.

This way it also eliminates girls who are just using apps like tinder to promote their IG or snapchat for attention whoring because guys would never see their profiles in the first place unless they swiped right on the guy. I guess you could couple that with making the girl initiate within 24 hrs like bumble to further weed out some of the attention whores and self promoters.

The point is don't reward them with the dopamine hit that a match brings until the guy has done the second screen, because all these excessive matches do is gas up the girl and make 6's think they are 10's when 95% of guys are swiping right on every girl.

Its true, I would love a yes to all button myself. I matched with a tranny two months ago ha ha.

In the apps defence I've actually met someone I liked on there, granted she is new to my city and not from here, Japanese but all in all a quality woman.

I think if you can match with foreigners you've a decent shout, its the locals that are up their own arses in the anglosphere in general.

Post: #32

(10-12-2017 09:27 PM)HermeticAlly Wrote:  ...New boots, same old worn-out puss.

That's a t-shirt right there.
Or rather :

"Tinder.
New boots, same old worn-out puss"

Post: #33

It is all a fucking scam. IAC group (that controls Tinder) owns all of these:


BlackPeopleMeet.com
Chemistry.com
Delightful
FriendScout24
HowAboutWe
Match.com
OkCupid
PlentyOfFish
Tinder
Twoo

They even attempted to buy Bumble but the leads (female) did not want to part ways and give the company up to the dark side.

IAC group, they have all of the market share and don't give two fucks about men because they have monetized fully male 'Thirst'. Now with data realised that majority of people now find relationships online versus in real life for the first time ever the Rubicon has been crossed and now IAC and TInder can go full tilt their campaign against men. "You need us more than we need you" TInder and IAC group will say to themselves and the scary thing is they may, in fact, be correct.

I sounded the alarm on Tinder years ago as a bear trap to get men addicted to the ease of little effort to try and roll the dice for the minor potential to bed women. All that has now resulted in a platform that gives women absolute control of the dating market on the platform with her putting in zero effort. Tinder has become so powerful to women they openly now mock the largest percentage of the revenue stream, which is men, very thirsty men.

You hope there will be blowback from this but with many men locked in for Tinder+, and so many men reliant on IAC products to get laid this may not be possible. Men need to get off online products which work to undermine your ability to get laid.

Post: #34

(10-12-2017 06:37 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 06:08 PM)Delta Wrote:  

Some women have something like this where as they get older the skin on their face tightens and their body shrinks in a gross way.

Perfect example:



WAIT


before you scroll down and find out who this is. . . how would you rate based just on looks alone?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


Now:




Sorry Natalie Portman fans. . . she isn't far behind:

Post: #35

Being evil ages you.

Post: #36

In regards to the idea that guys only see the girls who already swiped them: This is EXACTLY what Tinder Gold is. They make you pay extra for the ability to not waste your time swiping away thousands of fatties. Then you check the gold box and it’s still half fatties. But at least you can scroll through them to find the handful of women you’re willing to engage in a dialogue with.

Honestly who uses Tinder for more than 4 back and forth messages anyway? All the gif and feedback stuff is pretty pointless. As if this is an app for children and not busy adults?

Bumble almost got it right. Except that most women you match will never bother messaging you. So again they want you to pay extra to ping her lazy ass into writing you a text.

These apps are garbage. You basically just ignore the nonsense of it all. We’re looking for needles in haystacks. The only reason it’s worthwhile is because the online aspect allows for pipelining, multitasking, etc.

The truly bad thing has as much to do with smartphones. It just makes approaching and engaging women allthat much more annoying IRL when they’re addicted to their phones.

Post: #37

They supposedly admit that 'most men are good', so why not just avoid the douchebags instead of demanding 'menprovement'?

On the other hand, I really don't care what a bunch of frumpy, mid-30s women who are bitter that they can't land a man have to say.

Post: #38

(10-12-2017 09:08 PM)Steve McQueen Wrote:  It's completely pointless and unproductive that men should have to swipe at all on thousands of profiles. Men should get fed all of the "yes" swipes on them into a separate inbox where they then decide whether or not to confirm the match.

There used to be third-party apps that would allow you to automatically mass right-wipe, and the end result was essentially what you describe. I believe all such third-party apps have been squashed by Tinder.

I used to get some decent results with Tinder. Lately it has become a complete waste of time, along with all the other similar apps. Right-swiping nets only a few matches here and there, and usually the quality is in the toilet. Super Liking was once a fairly guaranteed way of getting matches, but now I think most girls accept the validation of a Super Like, but don't bother to match with the man who sent it.

I saw the first of the new Tinder ads a few days ago. As the women discuss "douchey" behavior from men, one of them laments that the last guy she dated had calf implants. I'm sure I'm not the only one who saw that and thought of how many women get implants in various part of their bodies. Is this douchebag behavior (or its equivalent) on the part of women?

In another ad, they have a guy hooked up to a machine designed to make him more "chivalrous." Chivalry is a controversial topic — some women complain because men lack it, but others find it patronizing and demeaning. So is he a douchebag because he isn't chivalrous, or is his lack of chivalry because he respects women as equals?

This is the inherent problem in women criticizing & condemning specific male behavior traits. Some women roll their eyes at guys who are hardcore bodybuilders, while others love the type. A white girl films herself walking through a ghetto area to expose the horrible men who catcall her. But the women who live in those neighborhoods would be disappointed if they didn't hear random complements as they walk down the street.

It's like women who decry "fuckboys," but they can't agree on what a fuckboy is. He's just something . . . bad. You'll know him when you meet him, I guess.

Also — Wikipedia says Whitney Cummings is 35? Give me a break. The woman in that Getty Images photo looks at least 47.

Post: #39

I’m a big fan of Tinder. It allowed me to smash an ungodly number of women in a short amount of time. The hypocrisy of this campaign... pffff.

This campaign is ugly, and it shows a lot of disdain for men. But I’m not going to let that ruin my day. Instead imma swipe a few times, engage a willing slut and have her come over. Right after I come, I will contemplate about Tinder and how much pussy it has brought me over the years. Like takeaway.com, but then with women craving some schlong.

Seriously. First making an app that allows me to fuck so much with little time investment and then preaching about “douchebags”... I had a good laugh.

The only bad I can see coming from this campaign is that womens expectations take a turn for the worst. What if a young woman see this, adopts their bitter mindset and goes into the dating market like that? Inspiring women to judge and criticize men all the time makes it hard for them to be open to what (good) men have to offer. Even if a good man is courting her she wouldn’t know it if she’s relying on what this campaign tells her is a “good man”.

Is she likely to end up halppily married, or sipping wodka with me and then riding my schlong? The latter of course, because a woman confused about what a good man is is easier to game.

Post: #40

(10-12-2017 11:06 PM)Scoundrel Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 09:08 PM)Steve McQueen Wrote:  It's completely pointless and unproductive that men should have to swipe at all on thousands of profiles. Men should get fed all of the "yes" swipes on them into a separate inbox where they then decide whether or not to confirm the match.

There used to be third-party apps that would allow you to automatically mass right-wipe, and the end result was essentially what you describe. I believe all such third-party apps have been squashed by Tinder.

I used to get some decent results with Tinder. Lately it has become a complete waste of time, along with all the other similar apps. Right-swiping only gets you a few matches here and there, and usually the quality is in the toilet. Super Liking was once a fairly guaranteed way of getting matches, but now I think most girls accept the validation of a Super Like, but don't bother to match with the man who sent it.

I saw the first of the new Tinder ads a few days ago. As the women discuss "douchey" behavior from men, one of them laments that the last guy she dated had calf implants. I'm sure I'm not the only one who saw that and thought of how many women get implants in various part of their bodies. Is this douchebag behavior (or its equivalent) on the part of women?

In another ad, they have a guy hooked up to a machine designed to make him more "chivalrous." Chivalry is a controversial topic — some women complain because men lack it, but others find it patronizing and demeaning. So is he a douchebag because he isn't chivalrous, or is his lack of chivalry because he respects women as equals?

This is the inherent problem in women criticizing & condemning specific male behavior traits. Some women roll their eyes at guys who are hardcore bodybuilders, while others love the type. A white girl films herself walking through a ghetto area to expose the horrible men who catcall her. But the women who live in those neighborhoods would be disappointed if they didn't hear random complements as they walk down the street.

It's like women who decry "fuckboys," but they can't agree on what a fuckboy is. He's just something . . . bad. You'll know him when you meet him, I guess.

Also — Wikipedia says Whitney Cummings is 35? Give me a break. The woman in that Getty Images photo looks at least 47.

No, that's the collective DNA from 30,000 cocks invading the cunthole of Whitney Creampie Cumdumpster's vaghole. Roosh linked to a study not too long ago. This would be penetration overdrive x 30,000.

Post: #41

Quote: (1) "overqualified" at work, (2) tips poorly, ... (4) is late

it ain't men known for those things…

Post: #42

Isn't that dude from Jersey Shore? The poster boy for douchebags?

Post: #43

(10-12-2017 09:22 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  In my idea, the guys would only see profiles when a girl swiped right on them. Otherwise they would see no profiles.

That's what Bumble gives you if you pay for premium. I am using it and it isn't really that much of an advantage. The only women who are swiping right are those with such low SMV that I would never have swiped right on them otherwise. Therefore exposing their swipes is only giving me the option to dumpster-dive.

I really think the only way to assist men is to use automation tools, something these apps/sites are constantly trying to prevent. But the biggest cost to a guy in using these things is the time.

Post: #44

Thanks for pointing out the IAC group owning multiple routes to encourage male thirst and inflate women's already gigantic egos. I feel Cattle Rustler's frame control post on NOT having a strong online presence is gold. Build your life, be a man of value and distinction who has no fucking *time* or interest to be e-diddling the e-clits of hordes of post wall hags and low quality women. For the rare gems you find you're feeding the engine of third and fourth wave feminism.

These apps are addictive, destructive time sinks that poison your mind. It's porn without the nudity - at least with porn once you come you can go on with your day. Tinder et al doesn't give that release.


"I'm a man playing with an app that feeds female egos and deflated my self-esteem just with the hope to get laid. Jeez is that really what I'm about?!"

Look yourself in the mirror and ask that question. If you are, then good luck. If you can't agree then as the Michael Jordan clip says - "Stop it. Get some help."

Just
Say
No

To Tindrugs!

Post: #45

(10-12-2017 08:58 PM)Steve McQueen Wrote:  "They bring in a post-wall "douchebag expert" "

I almost died laughing, brilliant

I can't wait for the old guy "slut expert" to be hired on this forum

Post: #46

(10-13-2017 08:46 AM)[email protected] Wrote:  Isn't that dude from Jersey Shore? The poster boy for douchebags?

One night, some liberal chick was showing me a profile of some guy on Tinder. He had no shirt, was ripped, and had a smug look on his face. Literally, he looked like a character from Jersey Shore (similar to the guy above).

She pointed the phone to me and said, "What do you think of this guy? What an asshole, huh?"

I responded with, "So how many times did you go out with him?"

She got uncomfortable: "Well twice...but that's not the point."

Post: #47

I agree with Kosko on the power dynamics of online dating being ever more centred on the female side. Women look upwards and never at their own level or below in the dating world.

When Tinder first came out it was easy for men to clean up, even dudes who couldn't approach in bars or clubs were getting laid. Eventually it petered out for most and you need to be in a good solid urban location with a good turn over for it to be worthwhile.

Post: #48

Did anyone notice notice that one of the criteria for being a douche bag is, "doesn't introduce to friends and family." If I knew how to insert gifs I would insert the Heston laughing gif. It's 2017, there is all this basic info on game available, and chicks still don't realize they're wife material. The hamster is a powerful thing friends.

Roosh maybe on to something about BLM launching a crusade against Tinder. For whatever reason the White God Factor is very alive on Tinder.

Post: #49

(10-13-2017 10:27 AM)Truth Tiger Wrote:  Thanks for pointing out the IAC group owning multiple routes to encourage male thirst and inflate women's already gigantic egos. I feel Cattle Rustler's frame control post on NOT having a strong online presence is gold. Build your life, be a man of value and distinction who has no fucking *time* or interest to be e-diddling the e-clits of hordes of post wall hags and low quality women. For the rare gems you find you're feeding the engine of third and fourth wave feminism.

These apps are addictive, destructive time sinks that poison your mind. It's porn without the nudity - at least with porn once you come you can go on with your day. Tinder et al doesn't give that release.


"I'm a man playing with an app that feeds female egos and deflated my self-esteem just with the hope to get laid. Jeez is that really what I'm about?!"

Look yourself in the mirror and ask that question. If you are, then good luck. If you can't agree then as the Michael Jordan clip says - "Stop it. Get some help."

Just
Say
No

To Tindrugs!

Although there is no doubt Tinder is low quality women, it's a big stretch to say porn whores are better than Tinderellas. Tinderellas are soulless sluts looking for their next high (i.e. fuck) with notch counts in the hundreds, but whores are constantly going through men for cash and prizes with notch counts in the thousands. At least a Tinderella will bang you because she finds you hot, the porn whores... you'll be lucky if you don't get herpes afterwards.

Always go for real women, better than jerking it to whores or paying for whores.

Personally, I use Tinder when I bother to remember, sorta like playing farmville but with broads. Gets me the occasional bang, but I'm no good at online game I focus on the real world 99.99%.

(10-13-2017 10:32 AM)scrambled Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 08:58 PM)Steve McQueen Wrote:  "They bring in a post-wall "douchebag expert" "

I almost died laughing, brilliant

I can't wait for the old guy "slut expert" to be hired on this forum

I thought Roosh already had that role?

(10-13-2017 12:37 PM)Mochihunter Wrote:  Did anyone notice notice that one of the criteria for being a douche bag is, "doesn't introduce to friends and family." If I knew how to insert gifs I would insert the Heston laughing gif. It's 2017, there is all this basic info on game available, and chicks still don't realize they're wife material. The hamster is a powerful thing friends.

Roosh maybe on to something about BLM launching a crusade against Tinder. For whatever reason the White God Factor is very alive on Tinder.

It shows a complete lack of self-awareness from these skanks... Introducing a Tinderella to your family is probably the best way to get rid of her

Post: #50

That is some serious woman-spreading:



Kick her off the subway!