I signed up with Tinder a couple of days ago, got a couple of matches but I'm not getting any replies. I'd like to ask you guys about your experience with this. Like, what's your "ratio" of getting replies in the first place?
Now I know I'm not sending them anything creepy in my first text. I'll be the first to admit that my first texts might not be too interesting (I guess I don't have the gift of the gab) though, but since they swiped right they should have been somewhat interested in the first place.
Or should I assume that a lot of them swipe right automatically and get swamped in matches? Any advice?
What are you sending them?
>Or should I assume that a lot of them swipe right automatically and get swamped in matches?
Why would they do that?
Relatively good looking male anon here (been told I'm an 8-9/10 repeatedly) with slightly over 1200 matches
Tinder is literally all looks. Post your profile so we can help you, what you're doing in pictures/how they're taken will have a big impact on how successful you are
>>17269356
Unless you're literally 10/10, getting 1/3 replies is pretty good going. Getting 1/10 is not unreasonable if you're average.
Please remember that even though 1/10 girls might reply on tinder, in real life that % would be far higher - women are pickier on tinder and only really want to chat with people that are 10/10 looks or 10/10 conversation
>>17269365
That depends. If I have something to work on in their profile - as in, it's filled out at all - I reference that. Otherwise it's something along the lines of wanting to know more about them. I know that's unoriginal, but I'm not sure if complimenting their looks is appropriate in a first message, plus it might be seen as shallow.
>>17269369
>slightly over 1200 matches
How long did that take?
>Post your profile so we can help you
I don't think I'm comfortable with posting something like that on 4chan. My pictures are selfie portraits made at home though. I'll be the first to admit that this isn't exactly impressive but I don't think I should be giving them too many false notions (like I'm an incredibly active or social guy).
>>17269377
>Unless you're literally 10/10, getting 1/3 replies is pretty good going. Getting 1/10 is not unreasonable if you're average.
So I guess they are ridiculously picky then. That's kind of what I expected, it's bullshit though if you consider that they also supposedly liked my profile. By all means I should already have my foot in the door so to speak, but apparently not.
Same goes for OKCupid. I had maybe around a 1/5 ratio of getting replies after mutual likes, and around 1/50 after no likes from them.
>republicans can't be trusted
Dropped
Why does she dye her bangs white?
>>17269391
Since April or so, daily use, I get matched maybe 1/2 or 2/3 people I see.
We can't help you without seeing your profile anon, but for your sake, lay it out like this:
First pic: you with an animal OR you with an instrument/doing an activity
Second pic: the one above you didn't use
Third pic: you with friends, ideally a mix of guys and girls (shows you get female attention and makes you look desirable)
Fourth pic: a selfie or a plain shot of your whole body
Fifth pic: another activity or group pic
For your bio, keep it short. Put profession height and two or three interests. The less you say the better
Saw a video on this. If you're a Calvin Klein model of what the media considers to be a conventionally attractive male, out of 1000 right swipes, your matching rate is at 33%, the girls will message you first at a rate of 3%. Those are not good odds for the average bloke.
Also the guy ITT with 1200 matches is just flat out lying, either that or he changes location to places in South America or Asia.
>>17269510
>flat out lying
No but I do change my location to other UK cities whenever I get bored to see who comes up
I just use it a lot
>>17269499
>First pic: you with an animal OR you with an instrument/doing an activity
>etc.
I'm not trying to dismiss your advice because I believe you know what you're talking about, but that would involve flagrant false advertising on my end.
>>17269545
You realise everybody false advertises right?
Just look how edited half the girls' pictures are. Humour me, try it for a day. You'll notice a huge spike in success with swiping.
>>17269510
This smells like bullshit. 3% is not accurate at all maybe 10-20% will.
t. 7-8/10 male
>>17269492
someone answer this please
Slutty costumes and blowjobs
>>17269585
>This smells like bullshit
Uh huh okay buddy
>7-8/10 male
Too bad you can't prove it
>>17269574
I'll think about it. The funny (sad?) thing is that I wouldn't even be able to scrounge together all pictures covering what you said if they were supposed to be somewhat up to date.
>>17269356
For you pictures:
1) Car selfie taken ~3 PM. Lighting is literally perfect.
2) Hoodie pic. Suck your cheeks in slightly to maximize angularity.
3) You in a suit next to people who are cool and good looking
4) You smiling with a dog or small horse
5) You playing an extreme sport w/ abs visible
guaranteed to slay
Decent looking guy here. The only thing I would offer you is a sandwich, and youre profile is some slutty goofy shit.
>>17270346
4) You smiling with a dog or small horse
Lol, small horse! That made me chuckle.
>>17269874
That's literally the funniest picture I have seen all year.
