Post: #526

I got my first lay out of bumble a week or so ago. First bumble date to be exact.

The whole thing of women having to message first just screws up a lot of the dynamic and it's frustrating to match with a girl who you've read a good opener you can use and never having the opportunity. Openers for online dating in my opinion are key; as i never send more than 10 messages before asking a date. Girls seem to respond best to those quick exchanges that give the feeling of 'we just clicked'. When a chick flatly opens the conversation with 'Hi' it seems like you're screwed to fizzle town from the outset. I've also matched with a lot of girls multiple times, who must be resetting accounts and such like. Still they make no real effort to initiate etc.

Still a bigger believer in Tinder, just because it gives the guy some control of the interaction from the get go. The Bumble girl last week was someone i used to go to school with, so that one was pretty easy going to get enough of a convo going. But other than that, i really struggle once the chicks are left to their own devices.

Post: #527

I have to agree wholeheartedly with abandoning all conversations that are not immediately engaging. I can accept some hours, or even a day or two passing before you’re able to have a decent and short exchange where you’re answering each other promptly, but you’d be unwise to relinquish momentum and not striking while the iron’s hot. As soon as you have her full attention, that’s your best, and probably last chance to get anywhere. I’m personally guilty of sometimes getting distracted and neglecting conversations with a still-open window of opportunity, and it almost always derails your momentum enough to render all previous hamster tinglings as null. This behaviour seems like the norm with much of the women I’ve come across as well, and it can become a nasty habit that may very well be socially contagious as we become desensitised to it.

Now, if we’re having a quick exchange where we’re answering each other within minutes insteads of hours, and they suddenly fail to respond to a direct question or do anything that makes the conversation flow feel unnatural, I immediately unmatch them. Especially if you’re talking to those 5’s and 6’s that you only bother with because you’re bored, lonely, or wanting the practice. They need the “no exceptions” kind of insta-punishment the most, for not only your own pride and ego, but so the lesser attractive/value guy whose on her same level doesn’t have to one day wonder why this cunt whose at or below his level feels an undeserved sense of entitlement due to having her way with thirsty guys that are dating downward. They don’t even realise the man is ever dating downward like how a man is full aware that the girl is out of his league; she’s only going to think she’s better than she actually is, every single time. Female psychopathy, perhaps, I don’t know.

No need to thank me, but if she has good conversation etiquette, there’s a chance she learned the hard way from others like myself that she can’t even appear to be stringing people along without consequence. The more of a prick I become about this, the more in control I am and things will be that much more likely to go your own way.

Post: #528

Quick review of Bumble's paid "Boost" feature:

I spent a few weeks in December/early January out of state visiting family and returned home to my college town several weeks before classes began, so my normal day game opportunities have been few and far between. I figured I'd give the swiping apps another shot, and I've done decently with Bumble before so that's where I started.

After swiping through the handful of girls in my age/location range (and getting nothing), I noticed the match screen had a single green circle with the number 15 in it. Clicking on that opened a pop up telling me that 15 girls had already swiped right, but I'd need to pay at least $8.99 for their Boost feature (this was for one week, it gets cheaper per week if you buy month(s) at a time).

I have a friend who works at Bumble so I asked him what exactly Boost was. He told me it was a time-saving upgrade that shows you girls that have swiped right on you (even if you haven't swiped on them), so instead of manually going through hundreds of girls you could simply open the app once in a while and see potential matches that already like you, then choose to accept them as matches.

(Of course you may still want to swipe regardless, because if a girl has paid for Boost and is doing the same thing - waiting to see who swipes on her before deciding to accept or decline - then neither of you will end up swiping on each other so won't be notified. But I doubt many women are paying for this feature.)

He added that most of these potential matches will come from women outside my location range, so that for example if I've set mine for five miles but some woman ten miles away has her range set to ten, then I'd show up in her pile even though she wouldn't show up in mine. So then it's possible she could swipe right on me even though I'd never see her to begin with, and that's where Boost comes in. Boost will still only include women within your preferred age range; location is the only parameter it opens up.

It seemed to me that if I had already gone through all the women within my maximum range, swiping on only attractive ones, then any of these potential Boost matches would either be 1) further away than desirable or 2) girls within my range that swiped right on me but weren't attractive enough for me to reciprocate.

Regardless, my town was pretty dead and I was curious, so I paid the nine bucks and began checking out my matches.

My previous expectations were confirmed. 14 out of the 15 were fatties/uggos that I never would have swiped right on to begin with, and even worse they were all from the state I had just left (they must have swiped on me while I was back home not using Bumble) so I didn't even bother hitting up the one attractive girl.

I immediately canceled the subscription (it'll bill you weekly if you don't), but it stayed active for the rest of the week and I continued to get a match or two every day, all from 3s and 4s that I had swiped left on.

I could see this feature being useful if you've just arrived in a huge city with lots of potential matches and don't want to manually swipe through hundreds of women, or if you're top 10% looks/height/etc., as being able to simply pick from all the girls that have already liked you would save you a decent amount of time.

But for the average guy, it's a complete waste of money. For me, it was a nine dollar reminder to get outside and approach girls in real life, so hopefully it will end up being money well spent.

Post: #529

Serena Williams, empowered woman, appears in a commercial for Bumble that will air during the Superbowl:

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/serena-william...ities.html

Quote: Serena Williams, Bumble put the ball in women's court with new ad at Super Bowl LIII originally appeared on goodmorningamerica.com

Super Bowl commercials are traditionally both must-watch TV and ads created by men, for men.

That appears to be changing.

This year’s Super Bowl features big brands starring female leads in their commercials, including one of the most buzzed-about: an ad for Bumble -- the dating and networking app where women make the first move -- which stars tennis superstar Serena Williams.

The commercial’s title, “The Ball is in Her Court,” was one of the first slogans for Bumble when it launched four years ago with an an all-female team led by Whitney Wolfe Herd.

"We are so, so proud to be in this together," Herd said on "Good Morning America" of Bumble's partnership with Williams. "We are going into the Super Bowl, a moment that really, really emphasizes celebrating men and we are here to say that we are here as well."

The Super Bowl commercial was created and directed by an all-female team too.

"That was really important to us, especially that we are airing this during the Super Bowl, something that is celebrated more for men," Williams, 37, said on "GMA." "Why not make a huge statement, and not only in front of the camera but also behind the camera, which is so important to have that support behind the camera as well."

The ad focuses not just on Williams as a tennis legend, but Williams as a woman.

“This is a different kind of Serena that we’re showing,” said Alex Williamson, Bumble’s chief brand officer. “We’re a relationship app so we’re not only talking about how strong she is professionally, in her sport, but also as a woman, as a mom, as a wife, as a friend.”

Williams has been outspoken her entire career, but particularly in the past year she has become a powerful voice for women’s equality, fighting for everything from equal pay to the right to wear what she wants to protections for working moms.

We’re taught as a society that we have to wait and be second, but that’s not true," Williams said. "We can be first. I love being first. I only like being first."

The Super Bowl ad, which will air in the first quarter of the Rams versus Patriots game, carries a message of empowerment for women "in everything that they’re doing and how they’re going after their lives," according to Williamson. Bumble hopes the ad also makes women think about the times they’ve "been told no, or to wait, or to be polite, or that it’s not their turn," and urges them not to allow themselves to be held back or limited.

"It really talks about women embracing making the first move, whether it’s on a date, in terms of let’s go out on a first date, or making friends or just going in a business room and saying, ‘Listen, I want an opportunity to have an interview for this job," Williams said. "There’s nothing wrong with doing that."

It's fitting, then, that Bumble is taking its message to the Super Bowl, where women are not among the players and where women have not historically been the target audience, even in the face of data showing they watch football.

"For us, it’s catering to a different demographic watching the Super Bowl," said Williamson. "There are so many women who watch the Super Bowl. We wanted that opportunity to really be in the living rooms of people across the nation and share our mission and share our story but to do it in the Bumble way, which is to go against what is expected of us to do."

Welp, the pussification of the NFL continues.

Post: #530

I didn't know bumble was for trannies.

Post: #531

Bumble is awesome where I live and within my demographic.

If you match with someone there (because you both like how each other looks, duh), and she messages you, then you're like 80% chance of closing that girl as long as you don't fuck it up. If they contact you then you're in. Period.

Do I like the fact that I can't initiate contact? Not really, but it also saves a fuckload of time for me. Once she says, "Hey", I know that if I want to, I'm closing her.

Post: #532

Setting up my profile now.

The Move Makers questions insult my intelligence. More precisely, the sample answers to each.

"My dream dinner guest is... Michelle Obama, RBG, Oprah"

”Two truths and a lie: I am published author, I had dinner with Obama, I scuba dive with sharks”

”If I could donate a million dollars, it'd be to... Helping women get out of abusive relationships”

"I feel most empowered when..." and "Equality to me means...” as questions.

”Go-to song is... 'God is a Woman', Ariana Grande”

"If I could guest-star on a show, it'd be on... The Handmaid's Tale"

"Must-see movie... 'RBG'"

"The world would be a better place with more... Electric cars"

"If I could solve one world problem, it'd be... Ending misogyny"

That doesn't even count the brunch-obsessed answers.

Starting to wonder if they gave me the chicks' form by mistake.

Post: #533

I have been using Bumble for 2 years and got only 1 bang (on the 3rd date) and a few waste of time dates. I think Bumble and Hinge are full of burned out women that have already been on Tinder and see those 2 apps as last resorts. In my opinion Bumble and Hinge are waste of time.

Post: #534

I've paused my account. Bumble was fantastic pre-2018, but a huge waste of time the last 6-12 months. I'm in NYC + have pro pics- and shit has slowed down tremendously.

Of all the mainstream apps, Hinge is where the action takes place.

Post: #535

I stopped using tinder ages ago as I get about 1 match every 2 months.

Out of curiosity I downloaded bumble recently. Is there a feature whereby bumble takes over the girls account or something?

I got a notification ''you have a new bee in hte hive'' or something

I note taht there is a conversation started: the message is like ''Boom. I'm Claire I've hacked Kelly's (kelly is the girls profile I have matched with) bumble account and i've found a match! Love dogs. What dog do you have?''

Just seems odd. Is it a weird bot thing that bumble do to force conversation on people or something to get the ball rolling or is it actually one of her friends or something lol

Post: #536

I've gotten a few conversations but nothing really coming up, I wound up getting ghosted even as I responded. My male co-workers who are on it have had the same issue.

50% of the women are "I will not date you if like Trump or Trump lovers need not apply" so they're writing off guys who might actually be a good match for them. Their problem, not mine. A lot of them post pictures of them around the world just to show they're not some bigot.

Post: #537

(02-17-2019 02:43 PM)Player_1337 Wrote:  I've paused my account. Bumble was fantastic pre-2018, but a huge waste of time the last 6-12 months. I'm in NYC + have pro pics- and shit has slowed down tremendously.

Of all the mainstream apps, Hinge is where the action takes place.

I'm in a big blue city in the south and have had pretty much the same experience.

The trend with these low-effort dating/swiping apps seems to be one of women flocking en masse to the hot new thing all the other girls are talking about, but then getting bored after a few months and leaving for the next shiny object that gets dropped in their path.

(02-17-2019 04:53 PM)subterfuge Wrote:  Just seems odd. Is it a weird bot thing that bumble do to force conversation on people or something to get the ball rolling or is it actually one of her friends or something lol

That sounds like a bot. Very common on Tinder (although I hadn't encountered one on Bumble yet). Doubt it's something the parent companies provide or endorse, more likely an individual trying to scam users by pretending to be a hot interested girl (who eventually asks for money).

(02-17-2019 06:17 PM)Kurgan Wrote:  50% of the women are "I will not date you if like Trump or Trump lovers need not apply" so they're writing off guys who might actually be a good match for them. Their problem, not mine. A lot of them post pictures of them around the world just to show they're not some bigot.

These girls are probably doing you a favor in telling you that they're not worth your time, but for what it's worth 95% of these statements are pure posturing/virtue signaling. I've fucked plenty of big city liberal girls in my bed right under a giant TRUMP sign I picked up myself at one of his rallies.

As long as you're attractive/turn them on they really won't give a fuck.

Post: #538

I don't know what the fuck is up with this app; the last few girls I matched with (who actually sent a first message) promptly unmatched me within a response or two. It seems like a glitch because that never happens to me. I never send any thirsty/creepy shit and I have photos that perform very well on Photofeeler and on other apps. It's been a month and a half... A MONTH AND A HALF since a girl has responded to me more than once on Bumble, and I've been swiping away quite a bit. I'm ready to officially pronounce this app dead.

Post: #539

I have to agree with everyone on this thread who has said the app is dead, at least here in Big Apple. At first I thought something was up with the algorithm but on Hinge I get about 2 to 4 likes a day, this is without even liking the profile. Of the profiles of above average looking girls I have liked, I have received a match close to about 30 to 40 percent of the time. I can get a date a week easily off of Hinge and she usually has above average looks.

As for Bumble, I have not had a match in over a month. It could just be that the demographic is different here in NYC because in the previous small city I was in, I would get 5 to 10 matches a week on Bumble.

Maybe it is city specific by app but Bumble is not the go to here unless someone has had a different experience.

Post: #540

^It's so bizarre how every relevant dating site/app goes to shit within a few years of gaining popularity and immediately gets replaced by the next shiny toy.

At the inception of online dating it was Match.com and eHarmony. Then the era of POF and OKCupid. Then along came Tinder. Then Bumble and Coffee Meets Bagel ruled for a while. And now, the consensus (including my own experience) is that Hinge is currently the place to be, while the ones that had past glory have become worthless cesspools.

It's as though the concept of a functional dating app is inherently unstable, like there's some negative feedback loop... as soon as a dating app gets good, that sets some process in motion that ultimately ruins it. This needs to be further pondered and studied.

Post: #541

(03-19-2019 11:48 PM)Delta Wrote:  ^It's so bizarre how every relevant dating site/app goes to shit within a few years of gaining popularity and immediately gets replaced by the next shiny toy.

At the inception of online dating it was Match.com and eHarmony. Then the era of POF and OKCupid. Then along came Tinder. Then Bumble and Coffee Meets Bagel ruled for a while. And now, the consensus (including my own experience) is that Hinge is currently the place to be, while the ones that had past glory have become worthless cesspools.

It's as though the concept of a functional dating app is inherently unstable, like there's some negative feedback loop... as soon as a dating app gets good, that sets some process in motion that ultimately ruins it. This needs to be further pondered and studied.

I think we know why this happens: as soon as men realise that a particular app is worthwhile the male:female ratio spikes, women are flooded with so many low quality options that it becomes tedious to filter through them all, and the women ditch the app for something else.

The same thing happens with nightlife venues - it will start off with good ratios, eventually men realise that it's a good place to pick up, and the place gradually goes to shit.

Many reports on this forum suggest that this phenomenon can affect entire cities too (although women can't ditch a city like they would an app or venue, they become less receptive)

Post: #542

Is this app only popular in in the US/UK or is this a worldwide thing?

Post: #543

It’s a ‘feminist’ app so it will mostly be used in the Anglo financial-democracies.

Post: #544

Installed and tried Bumble in Sydney yesterday, for the first time.

Got a load of high quality women on, matched with a few, opened by a few (oh my god women are shit at opening and banter)

Looks more promising than the usual RSVP thats popular in Sydney.

Post: #545

(03-19-2019 11:48 PM)Delta Wrote:  It's as though the concept of a functional dating app is inherently unstable

Match was around for years and became very popular before Tinder upset the applecart. The worst part about swipers taking over from more full-featured dating sites like Match or OK Cupid is the lack of filtering criteria. I mean, the psychology of the swipe is really not that different from an animalistic club scene approach, which is really a regression. The whole advantage of dating sites was to be able to publish more relevant info so that you can be more selective. I don't even want to signal my interest with a woman only to find out she's a single mom with 3 kids and only has every other weekend to herself or that she loves country music or hip hop or she's a stealth feminazi/sjw that just doesn't happen to have a bullring and blue hair.

That phenomenon has to also be playing out on the female side. It's all well and good for women to match with Chad Thundercock. I know how much that must flatter their egos, but if they're looking for something more than just a bootycall, they're still going to have to do a lot of screening through the chat. It's just tedious having to run through a checklist in the chat that could very well have been mandatory questions as part of the profile and filter criteria. It also kills the mood to ask these questions mechanically right off the bat, but if you sidestep in the interest of being charming and the showstoppers emerge later you've just burned way too much time and effort going down a dead-end.

If you think about it, it really is dating with one hand tied behind your back and only works optimally for those looking for disposable casual sex.

Having women message first doesn't solve any of the above problems.

Post: #546

Thats bang on Questor. I am finding that out, matching with unsuitables, but its taking time and chat to find out.

Post: #547

(04-07-2019 11:13 PM)questor70 Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 11:48 PM)Delta Wrote:  It's as though the concept of a functional dating app is inherently unstable

Match was around for years and became very popular before Tinder upset the applecart. The worst part about swipers taking over from more full-featured dating sites like Match or OK Cupid is the lack of filtering criteria. I mean, the psychology of the swipe is really not that different from an animalistic club scene approach, which is really a regression. The whole advantage of dating sites was to be able to publish more relevant info so that you can be more selective. I don't even want to signal my interest with a woman only to find out she's a single mom with 3 kids and only has every other weekend to herself or that she loves country music or hip hop or she's a stealth feminazi/sjw that just doesn't happen to have a bullring and blue hair.

That phenomenon has to also be playing out on the female side. It's all well and good for women to match with Chad Thundercock. I know how much that must flatter their egos, but if they're looking for something more than just a bootycall, they're still going to have to do a lot of screening through the chat. It's just tedious having to run through a checklist in the chat that could very well have been mandatory questions as part of the profile and filter criteria. It also kills the mood to ask these questions mechanically right off the bat, but if you sidestep in the interest of being charming and the showstoppers emerge later you've just burned way too much time and effort going down a dead-end.

If you think about it, it really is dating with one hand tied behind your back and only works optimally for those looking for disposable casual sex.

Having women message first doesn't solve any of the above problems.

Online dating should not be used to look for a LTR. I prefer the increased quantity/quality of women that the swipe method brings over having to read a fucking essay on some girl I might not even click with. Also if there are no swipe/like filter the site is unusable for women since ugly betas just fill their inbox with messages.

Post: #548

(04-08-2019 04:19 AM)RatInTheWoods Wrote:  Thats bang on Questor. I am finding that out, matching with unsuitables, but its taking time and chat to find out.

Yes. It's frustrating to me because technology is supposed to save time, not suck it away. I mean, I program for a living and it just seems like none of these sites/apps are oriented with time-efficiency in mind.

Post: #549

Upgraded to paid. I see all the matches, finally. Some are ok. I put new photos on my profile as well.

What is best way to get a reply... For example I got a match saturday night and she didn't respond to my message. Might as well work each lead, since they matched with me.. Current conversation thread:

her: hi.
Me: were you at x venue tonight, i think i saw your doppelganger there?

Still new to this online dating stuff.

Post: #550

I looked at the London offerings in a dummy account on Bumble.
Overall the quality looked surprisingly high. And I'm very fussy.
Do the algos list better looking hoes first to get people to sign up for a paid account?
Are there a lot of fake profiles?
Lots of the hoes listed their Insta accounts. I wonder if they are just fishing for followers/attention or are genuinely dating?

I also looked at Bumble and the rest on Trustpilot, the British review site of consumer businesses.
Bumble's reviews were pretty poor, as were pretty much ALL the dating sites.

Lots of people here paint dating sites as a disaster ie fake hoe profiles, no uptake etc.
Do people here rate Bumble? If yes or not, how do you think it compares to the rest in your location?