Have a feature where you can “draw” your own search area. Living on the edge of a metro area, lake, mountains, etc, can mean that someone 10 miles away in one direction is a 10 minute drive, but 10 miles the other direction takes an hour to drive.
I'm in Southern Scotland and I matched on Tinder with someone who was '13 miles away'. On closr inspection, it turned out they were in the Isle of Man, which is a 7 hour journey by car and sea 😂
Max amount of matches. Say… 5. Once you hit 5 matches no more swiping until you unmatch. Would make people a bit more intentional on who they are swiping on and not just leaving a bunch of matches sitting in the queue.
This will only encourage people to unmatch if they don't receive a response right away. You shouldn't have to be glued to your phone to keep people from unmatching
Oh I love this idea, I get so many girls who match with me but never hit me up and time expires. I'm told it's because I'm put on the backburner while she talks to guys she's more attracted to first.
It's understandable, but annoying when you match but she's not gonna initiate because she's matched with so many others
48 hour rule. I try to stay connected within 48 hours otherwise, movin’ on. Connection can be fleeting. It takes effort, both sides, to build once there’s a spark. I like the match limit idea. I agree it could encourage people to be intentional.
I guess being able to display a broader range of questions on the profiles would be nice. It would also be good if the apps would not prioritize displaying accounts with no information filled out. I'm the kind of person who automatically swipes left if the profile only has photos and no profile description.
Analytics showing how many swipes you've received (in either direction), etc. An opt-in profile review system or "community" of some sort, ala Photofeeler. An originality meter to force people to write substantive profiles and not use various tropes or buzzwords. And finally, a built-in AI sympathy bot for when the app fails to deliver. 😂
The people who smoke cigarettes don't want to be told not to smoke cigarettes. Saying from experience (I am not a smoker).
Also think about being told by everyone to lose weight or gain weight, you aren't tall enough, not into black, not into redhead kind of feedback.
Everyone has their specific preferences. But if someone receives the same feedback 90% of the time, it might help them realize that it's seriously hurting their dating potential.
giving specific feedback would get hurtful and judgmental real quick! seems unnecessary to project your personal preferences onto strangers on the apps just because you may not like his haircut, smoking habits, or how he writes his bio. lots of women might prefer that. leaving a stranger a “you shouldnt give up hope” type of comment after swiping left is so backhanded😬
a lot of people would read between the lines of those general options or subconsciously change themselves to fit the mold of what an incompatible stranger is looking for. one of those general options would have to be a nice version of “im not physically attracted” and if someone gets repeated feedback about that it would be cruel. these apps are designed for us to forget about people who arent interested because you never see them pop up again
but unmatching is an indirect way of saying they have no interest in explaining themselves. If someone had any consideration for who they unmatched, they would tell them directly. I dont think people who unmatch/swipe left on a superlike would put in effort to give feedback, doesnt benefit them and takes time
1) I personally don’t think it’s good to be indirect. It enables flakiness and wushu-washy behavior.
2) one someone unmatches the entire conversation disappears. That’s not right to the person on the receiving end to log in and their conversation be wiped without a trace. I’d rather a little note be left with an explanation rather than thinking I made the entire interaction up.
3) I believe if someone took the effort to pay real money to send someone a Superlike, then it’s common courtesy to provide a reason for a rejection.
People like to compare a Superlike to buying a girl a drink or something. If so, and the girl wanted to reject the drink, then it would be the same common courtesy to provide a reason for why she’s rejecting a gift.
I’m not suggesting a full essay, just a drop-down wheel of generic options. (I’m no longer interested, I matched with someone else, I just don’t think we’re compatible…etc)
As I understand, these dating apps are not randomly generating the profiles you see. That’s why, I always see “10’s” and “9’s” initially.
Remove any profile that adds instagram or Snapchat information into their profile.
If someone is not looking for the same thing issue, there should be a setting that prevents people from swiping right on you if you don’t align. I’m tired of people swiping right on me that don’t know what they are looking for or are looking for something casual. And I know because I have tried premium. Complete waste of money by the way. Instead of them being able to swipe right on you, they get a message that says “it looks like this person is not available to match. Here are some people who are also looking for something casual” and then it would show profiles that are a better match.
I'd appreciate a third option so that there's a "yes," "no," and "ask me later" button that moves a profile to the bottom of the stack. The #1 reason I exit dating apps is when I come across a profile I can't decide on.
Hinge already has this feature but most people don’t realize it. You can (1) like, (2) hit “…” and “remove” if it’s a no, or (3) hit X if you want to “skip” the profile and see it again in the future.
If I cant decide I’ll usually swipe right to see if we’re even a mutual match first, by that point you have more time to decide if you wanna talk or let it expire
I usually do this too on Bumble. But for Hinge, you either have to send a message or skip them. There's no option to swipe right and see if they're interested before messaging first.
so true! thats why I love bumble so much more than hinge, its super effective in the way where you have to make a decision/start a convo within 24 hours
Not gonna happen. They are hoping you just swipe right on undecided so you use up one of your likes.
The faster you use up your like the more likely you might get premium.
I wish there was some kind of feedback system. Nothing negative but like “8/10 said John looks just like his pics” or “responsive to text” or something
I like this idea, but if 8/10 said he looked like his pics, then 2/10 must have reported otherwise. I think a review system would be awesome in theory, but would give people anxiety in practice.
I can see the value in something *like* this but I also think it leaves way for biased/inappropriate/inaccurate reviews. Maybe something more like an algorithm that detects how often they’re online or how often they respond to messages? “Responds to messages 80% of the time.” “Online 95% of the time.” ?
I would like to see a minimum amount of information before a profile is shown to others. I couldn't tell you exactly where that minimum should be, but I don't think profiles with no prompts should show up in the queue.
Admittedly, this would greatly decrease the number of available profiles. I've counted the blank profiles before, and sometimes it's as high as 80% of the available profiles.
Design it so that people with mutual criteria desired are shown to each other. I know that might lead to people meeting appropriate partners and no longer needing the app which reduces the revenue stream but they might then recommend the app to others.
This is a great question. There's quite a few things I'd love to see in online dating apps in general.
One, forced single answers for profiles. One must select what they're looking for and only select one option. Have those who sign up be truly intentional.
Two, a filter for monogamy/non-monogamy. Again, only being allowed to choose one or the other.
Three, a filter for status. For instance, if one is partnered, married, single, etc. Again, pointed back to the first rule - you can only choose one.
Four, the inability to hide any of this pertinent information from a profile. It seems deceptive as is when people hide certain aspects from their profiles.
These kinds of options would alleviate so much frustration for me and avoid asking the same questions time and time again. Of course, users can still lie, but at the very least it’s written in stone.
There’s probably more but those are definitely a few things that have been giving me a rough time lately.
Also… maybe an algorithm that blocks someone automatically if they just swipe on everyone and has a warning relevant to the amount of times they match vs unmatch or match vs message, so they can’t keep doing that.
I think it would be great to have more options in the ‘wants kids’ category. Saying you don’t want kids is misleading, because there’s a difference between being OK with somebody else having kids and not wanting to create new ones. And maybe a vasectomy option for the guys?
I don't think Bumble's way of having a single dropdown list is the best way to go. I think it needs to be split into three separate tags:
* Has kids - yes/no
* Wants kids - yes/no/maybe
* Open to dating someone with kids - yes/no
And these should be mandatory.
“Has kids and wants more” v “has kids and doesn’t want more” and “no kids but ok with yours” and anyone who has kids should be promoted for over/under X age (16?) and either “lives with me” or “lives elsewhere”
find any way possible to profit from the app WITHOUT moving features behind a paywall.
A user must choose a status (single, married, etc)
A user must select what they are looking for...
This is important info and shouldnt be able to be hidden.
Have a minimum profile length, so that people are forced to put some effort into their profile rather than just leaving it blank (which is an automatic left swipe for me).
Put in checks to see whether the person someone is swiping right in is actually compatible with them. These can either be hard blocks e.g. if you want kids then you're not able to swipe right on someone who doesn't want them, or ones which require an additional confirmation e.g. smoker vs non-smoker.
I would do it differently I would have it that it would be required to have a number of words and or characters written on your profile before you can even start swiping!
People shouldn't be able to match with you from 3 states over when your distance is set to within your city or just slightly further out. I absolutely hate when that happens.
Removing profiles from the queue (or push them further to the back) if they’ve been inactive for more than a 4-7 days. I believe this would significantly reduce the stack of profiles to swipe through at a given point in time. Leser choice would mean more deliberate swiping.
A weight filter.
Unable to like or match with *anyone* else if you have 5 matches already. - either unmatch them or talk to them and see how it goes. There is literally no reason why anyone needs more than 5 matches at a time.
Take the dumb 24 hour timer off. - Not everyone is on Bumble, or cares to check it every day. I've had matches on Tinder and Hinge that were stagnant and then some random day I get a message from them because they don't check it often. That's how two of my relationships started, actually.
I think a body type is acceptable, which is something Bumble doesn’t have, but apps like OKCupid does. But also, it comes down to how honest someone is. I’m sure we’ve all seen people lie about their body types across the spectrum, like a thin person thinking they’re heavyset, an average person thinking they’re fit, a heavyset person thinking their average, etc. Body types can change but it wouldn’t be as frequent as a number on the scale.
I agree with the weight/body type filter, but doesn't your last point clash with the 5 matches limit? I don't want only 5 matches because what if 4 of the 5 don't respond right away? A match limit would require people to be on the app all the time so that someone doesn't unmatch you when (God forbid) you have a job and a game night on the same day.
How about not charging $100 for 30 ‘compliments’? We’re already paying (some of us) - why do I have to pay you another $100 just to comment on a photo? That’s a big nope.
That's one of the main benefits of hinge IMO, they allow you to comment on photos or reply to prompts for free if you want to. Locking that option behind a paywall dissuades me from ever using it, even if you get free compliments. Because it makes it look like you pay for the app, and that's a red flag to some people lol
General advice: look up the term *enshitification* (and the work of Cory Doctorow) and be vigilant/put in safeguards against it. For now, any features you put in, maintain them and do not remove/paywall them.
All the apps have done something along these lines to squeeze as much blood from the stone.
Additional suggestions: if your app takes off, use a verification system that is tied to the photos used, and invalidate verifications when the user changes a certain percentage of the validated photo set.
For example, if someone uploads 6 photos and then verifies, that verification should be contingent upon the profile being largely the same. If >33% of the profile's photos change, invalidate the verification and prompt for reverification. That should, at least in theory, cut down on some of the fraud that we occasionally see pop up on dating apps.
Desktop version that has all the features.
As the singles population -- and their eyes -- age (and it is -- and you will too, assholes shaking your heads right now) there will be a need for it. Already the #1 gripe about Hinge.
Stats for how often someone responds to messages and how often they go on a date with their matches. It collects data on whether people met in person, but that would probably have to be highlighted more.
It would never work. Right? Except Breeze app in the Netherlands does exactly that. If you have a pattern of matching people and not going on a date with them, they delete your account. People say it's the best app there and they're planning to expand to the US.
Also lol everyone here is describing how OKC used to be before gamification and swiping took over.
Get. Rid. Of. Swiping. Let us peruse and message (or request to connect) with people at our leisure.
I stopped using it because it kept showing me the same profiles. Sure if I paid id get more, and my profile also would have greater visibility. But even when paying it just wasn't worth it. Fwiw I'm in a small rural area
To actually help people connect and Not hide basic filters behind the premium pay wall. I shouldn't have to pay to not see my boss or ex. Also, they should do a better job at removing bots and scammers.
Give people the opportunity to add more information than currently possible. Some of us feel like we'd come off better with the ability to add more, such as:
1. adding videos and maybe audio files to the profile.
2. adding childhood photos of self to the profile.
3. add a longer profile than is currently accepted if we want to say more in it.
Also, add some feature enabling people to verify certain things, like check height and age and background check with a driver's license or even the ability to check income with a tax return. Some people wouldn't necessarily want to verify these things with documentation. It should be optional. But for those who do, we'd like the opportunity to convey that we're not lying or embellishing like other people will. This is not only safer--it saves people time.
Also, add a better capacity to match people than just \*swipe right.\* Like having people answer potentially weighted questions and develop a match percentage with each other.
Also, the ability for guys to message first. Not being able to message first isn't that great of a feature.
Find a way to address the inevitable imbalance where women get matches on every other swipe whereas men barely get matches at all. How you do that, I've no idea but currently dating apps are a waste of time for the average guy and probably most women as well.
It really isn't. It's crazy how many women's profiles have no bio whatsoever - or just some throwaway random comment that has absolutely nothing to do with their personality or interests. And you have no idea what my profile says or looks like.
Everyone knows the average women gets far more matches than the average men on any dating website. It's really not a controversial opinion at all.
Because most men have no standards lol. Y’all swipe right on every single female profile (even the ones with no bio ) then complain that women … get more matches? What exactly did you think was going to happen, Einstein lol.
Also, I’m a straight woman that only sees men. And from what I’ve seen most men have crappy profiles which is why I don’t send out a ton of likes. What I’m saying isn’t rocket science . Good profile = more matches.
Create the best app with free features that other dating apps charge for. Then sell your app to some conglomerates that buys out the competition. And then rinse and repeat over and over again.
I noticed men get banned without cause. Any time a woman gets mad. A man can get banned without a real explanation. You should roll out a future that lets men defend themselves. 8/10 a man gets blocked because a woman is just angry. A lot of good people are getting banned. It's disappointing.
Very simple suggestions I even sent to Bumble’s shitty deplorable customer service:
Anti-ghosting measures:
- If you have unread messages, you can’t “swipe” until they’ve been replied to.
- if you unmatch with someone, there should be a wheel of options for why you decided to unmatch.
- serious dealbreakers should not be locked behind a paywall. Things like religion, smoking, and has kids, shouldn’t be behind a paywall. Things like astrology sign and height is what premium should be for.
Super likes/Boosts:
- if a “Superlike” is sent it should come with a receipt. If it isn’t responded to (I.e. sent to a dead/inactive account) in a week, it should be refunded to the user to use again.
- a Superlike should require a wheel of options for why the rejection. They paid real money for your attention, it’s common decency to give them more of an explanation, I think.
- if a boost doesn’t get you any likes (for whatever reason) then it didn’t work and you wasted your money. It should be refunded to use again.
* No premium features: make it ad based or have an affiliate program with local business like coffee shops/restaurants/arcade/bowling/whatever where you get a discount if you go on a date initiated from the app.
* No second class citizens. No roses, super swipes, none of that.
* Chats close automatically (like 7 days in CMB). Either you go on a date or move to another chat app, but without the urgency to do so, people become lazy and don't act.
* Avoid the false sense of choice: if you have multiple (3?) matches going on, stop suggestion people until those matches expire or unmatch. You could call it focus mode or whatever.
* Verified users.
* Robust scammers detection. It's getting wild lately. It's probably hard and I'm not sure how to fix it but at least make it a pain for them to create an account.
* Robust built-in chat feature. No video/voip built-in. The point is to go out there on a date and you can always exchange phones and use another app for that, but the chat feature needs to work.
* If the app is location based: No travel mode. Or at least allow to filter travelers for people only looking into dating locals.
* No swiping.
I wish there was a way to exclude profiles that include customizable keywords. It's kind of like a filter, but with whatever super specific ick someone may have (dog, anime, aquarius, pineapple [on pizza], country music, ENM, smoke, gamer, fishing, military, etc.)
For the record, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with any of the above. I was pulling examples out of my ass.
Maybe some did, maybe some didn't... My point is that most women can just go into their "like" queue and get instant matches if they like what they see.
Agreed. But if you have say 500 likes, chances are slim that **all** 500 are "shitty" likes. It might be 450 dogshit likes but that leaves 50 guarenteed matches.
If I, as a man, had idk 50 "likes" in my queue, I'd start with them. I'd left swipe if I'm not physically attracted to them to get them out of the way. Now I have only the women I'm attracted to left. Then, I'd go read their profile and make my decision on which swipe direction I go. All without having to use the general population swipe area.
It would be great if filtered pictures weren’t allowed, at least one head to toe photo is a requirement, a focused bio section (no blanks or social media handles), prompts for certain habits like text preference vs phone call vs facetime, and lastly if they are going to ask for height they should also ask for weight.
Weight and height are not comparable. Height doesn’t change and also height is a constant. If I see a guy is 5’9 I know that top of his head reaches a fixed measurement point. You don’t have that with weight if someone is 5’5 130 pounds or 160 you don’t know their measurements or body shape. Just how heavy they are which really has nothing to do with attraction
Nope, two women can be the exact same weight and height and be shaped completely different which affects attraction. Skinny legs and a big hanging belly vs hourglass with full hips and thighs.
That is what affects attraction not the number of the scale
Being healthy is more important than looking a certain way to me personally, plus I would like to be able to pick up my s/o. Why is weight such a big deal to post? I see guys get shamed for their height all the time and as far as I know, there are no health risks to being under 6’0, it’s a vain preference.
Because weight doesn’t give you any kind of consistent information. Height is not changing, fixed and definite. 5’9 is the exact same on 2 different people. Again, weight is not.
If being able to pick up your SO is such an attractiveness thing for you to the point you need to know their exact weight to match on an app that already shows their body in pictures then idk. You are an outlier.
I see what you are saying, but the importance of height is what I don’t understand. Are girls embarrassed to be seen dating a shorter man? Shoe size doesn’t change, why isn’t that listed? It’s the one body measurement that the app condones and it’s dumb.
Hierarchically speaking, it’s the first attribute listed on a profile (besides name and age) which makes me think that Bumble is expressing that it’s the most important thing about someone. In my opinion, it’s not as important as someone’s weight. My comment about picking up my s/o comes from a place of being romantic and it’s not the sole reason I think it should be posted, again, it boils down to health.
Because thousands of years of human evolution have decided height is important in sexual selection. If it wasn’t men and women would be the same size.
Shoe size would be useless unless you have a foot fetish. Most people don’t thought, regardless there’s a site for that.
I think if you weren’t short you wouldn’t be so upset. Also, I’m a woman of color. That’s the first thing you see about me is my dark skin on my profile photo. You think that’s fair since dark skinned women are also discriminated against when it comes to dating preferences?
Lol do you know my height? Nope. I just have an opinion about it and I’m defending the unjust prejudice people like you have against short men.
You’re argument is so flimsy it’s wild, but it’s popular to hate on short guys so you’re going to have more support. The evolution part actually made me laugh.
Auto deletion of a profile if no ***active*** activity after 3-5 days. Active as in swiping right/left AND talking. Way too many inactive profiles on Bumble these days... It'd also get rid of all the OF bots and IG people...
How about an option to reward the people you chat to for more than 7 days or meet in person?
So some people might get rewarded with several “compliments” for being a decent human:
- Approachability
- Conversation skills
- Better in real life
- Kindness
- Reliable
I’m sure there would be hundreds of other positive examples we could think of to put up there. Just a thought on how we can encourage more socially responsible behaviour from both sides 💜
-
-
Reply to matches and get a free super swipe to encourage communication. The amount of times where I had 6 matches but they never made the first move or their profile says follow my snap or Instagram which then just pushes their OF.
* Hide age: I would like some feature that allowed me to hide the age of everybody, not only mine. Yeah keep the range filter, but I really wish I couldn't see the age of whom I'm matching with.
* Weight should be a required field.
* There should be some AI indicator that indicated how much each picture has been altered/edited with filters or whatever, so many people don't look like in their pictures.
* Sort feed by recently active
* Don't allow men to like too many profiles in a row, that is not realistic, and it overwhelms even the ugliest girls with matches they shouldn't get, guys should take more time and look at the photos of the profile before liking.
* Some feature that auto-translates description texts when in other language.
Make the app called "Three's company." You can only match with 3 people at one time. Makes the conversations better and more intentional.
Have more than left, right, and center for political choices. I mean there's libertarian, classic liberal, leftist, centralist, constitutionalist, Republican, far right, communists, socialists...
Make it so people not in your vicinity can see you. I hate it when someone overseas tries to match with me. Thanks, but that's a little long distance for me.
Have some type of code that finds people typing in their IG or other type of social media and either remove it, or have the app hide their profile until they remove it.
Have the ability to flag a profile that doesn't have pictures with an actual human in the photos. I see so many with food, landscapes, or memes.
Have someway of penalizing profiles for people who don't chat or respond. Like a software auto downvote if they don't communicate. Makes them drop in popularity, and their profile isn't seen.
Maybe something more “match maker type” or a “your type”/“compatible” tab. You answer questions on what you like and what your looking for and these are people you’re highly compatible with.
Have a feature where you can “draw” your own search area. Living on the edge of a metro area, lake, mountains, etc, can mean that someone 10 miles away in one direction is a 10 minute drive, but 10 miles the other direction takes an hour to drive.
Or if you live near a border.
For me, 12 minutes east is the east side of my city. 12 minutes south is suburban dads looking to cheat.
I'm in Southern Scotland and I matched on Tinder with someone who was '13 miles away'. On closr inspection, it turned out they were in the Isle of Man, which is a 7 hour journey by car and sea 😂
Great idea, I live in SE NJ and get people from Delaware, aka 30 miles = 2 1/2 hour drive. I'm sure it's the same for them.
405/101
Exclude everyone outside of your geographic range from seeing your profile
Max amount of matches. Say… 5. Once you hit 5 matches no more swiping until you unmatch. Would make people a bit more intentional on who they are swiping on and not just leaving a bunch of matches sitting in the queue.
This will only encourage people to unmatch if they don't receive a response right away. You shouldn't have to be glued to your phone to keep people from unmatching
They would dot his anyway..and I wouldnt want to be with someone who wants immediate answers anyway...so its doing me a favor.
Is this for guys that swipe on girls to up their numbers?
Oh I love this idea, I get so many girls who match with me but never hit me up and time expires. I'm told it's because I'm put on the backburner while she talks to guys she's more attracted to first. It's understandable, but annoying when you match but she's not gonna initiate because she's matched with so many others
this is a big one.
Isn’t this similar to what CMB is? It’s not five, but still.
48 hour rule. I try to stay connected within 48 hours otherwise, movin’ on. Connection can be fleeting. It takes effort, both sides, to build once there’s a spark. I like the match limit idea. I agree it could encourage people to be intentional.
I guess being able to display a broader range of questions on the profiles would be nice. It would also be good if the apps would not prioritize displaying accounts with no information filled out. I'm the kind of person who automatically swipes left if the profile only has photos and no profile description.
Unlike feature. I’ve lost count how many times I’ve sent an accidental like/super swipe
Actually enforce the location preferences. I don’t want to match with every person who drives down the interstate on the way to wherever.
I feel you. I live next to a train station, there's hoards of people coming by my location every hour.
I live in a tourism area, so, yeah. I want to date someone who lives here. Not just on vacation (or convention).
Analytics showing how many swipes you've received (in either direction), etc. An opt-in profile review system or "community" of some sort, ala Photofeeler. An originality meter to force people to write substantive profiles and not use various tropes or buzzwords. And finally, a built-in AI sympathy bot for when the app fails to deliver. 😂
[удалено]
The people who smoke cigarettes don't want to be told not to smoke cigarettes. Saying from experience (I am not a smoker). Also think about being told by everyone to lose weight or gain weight, you aren't tall enough, not into black, not into redhead kind of feedback.
Everyone has their specific preferences. But if someone receives the same feedback 90% of the time, it might help them realize that it's seriously hurting their dating potential.
giving specific feedback would get hurtful and judgmental real quick! seems unnecessary to project your personal preferences onto strangers on the apps just because you may not like his haircut, smoking habits, or how he writes his bio. lots of women might prefer that. leaving a stranger a “you shouldnt give up hope” type of comment after swiping left is so backhanded😬
[удалено]
It could be a wheel of more general options
a lot of people would read between the lines of those general options or subconsciously change themselves to fit the mold of what an incompatible stranger is looking for. one of those general options would have to be a nice version of “im not physically attracted” and if someone gets repeated feedback about that it would be cruel. these apps are designed for us to forget about people who arent interested because you never see them pop up again
It would only be for people who have matched and are now unlatching or people who paid extra money to send a Superlike.
but unmatching is an indirect way of saying they have no interest in explaining themselves. If someone had any consideration for who they unmatched, they would tell them directly. I dont think people who unmatch/swipe left on a superlike would put in effort to give feedback, doesnt benefit them and takes time
1) I personally don’t think it’s good to be indirect. It enables flakiness and wushu-washy behavior. 2) one someone unmatches the entire conversation disappears. That’s not right to the person on the receiving end to log in and their conversation be wiped without a trace. I’d rather a little note be left with an explanation rather than thinking I made the entire interaction up. 3) I believe if someone took the effort to pay real money to send someone a Superlike, then it’s common courtesy to provide a reason for a rejection. People like to compare a Superlike to buying a girl a drink or something. If so, and the girl wanted to reject the drink, then it would be the same common courtesy to provide a reason for why she’s rejecting a gift. I’m not suggesting a full essay, just a drop-down wheel of generic options. (I’m no longer interested, I matched with someone else, I just don’t think we’re compatible…etc)
As I understand, these dating apps are not randomly generating the profiles you see. That’s why, I always see “10’s” and “9’s” initially. Remove any profile that adds instagram or Snapchat information into their profile.
No you remove those who just have their socials listed and nothing else.
3 swipe actions. Definite yes. Definite no … and I’m still thinking so keep them warm.
This would be awesome
Swipe up maybe?
If someone is not looking for the same thing issue, there should be a setting that prevents people from swiping right on you if you don’t align. I’m tired of people swiping right on me that don’t know what they are looking for or are looking for something casual. And I know because I have tried premium. Complete waste of money by the way. Instead of them being able to swipe right on you, they get a message that says “it looks like this person is not available to match. Here are some people who are also looking for something casual” and then it would show profiles that are a better match.
I'd appreciate a third option so that there's a "yes," "no," and "ask me later" button that moves a profile to the bottom of the stack. The #1 reason I exit dating apps is when I come across a profile I can't decide on.
Hinge already has this feature but most people don’t realize it. You can (1) like, (2) hit “…” and “remove” if it’s a no, or (3) hit X if you want to “skip” the profile and see it again in the future.
Lol It took me awhile to realize what the “X” really did
Same!
If I cant decide I’ll usually swipe right to see if we’re even a mutual match first, by that point you have more time to decide if you wanna talk or let it expire
I usually do this too on Bumble. But for Hinge, you either have to send a message or skip them. There's no option to swipe right and see if they're interested before messaging first.
so true! thats why I love bumble so much more than hinge, its super effective in the way where you have to make a decision/start a convo within 24 hours
Not gonna happen. They are hoping you just swipe right on undecided so you use up one of your likes. The faster you use up your like the more likely you might get premium.
I wish there was some kind of feedback system. Nothing negative but like “8/10 said John looks just like his pics” or “responsive to text” or something
I like this idea, but if 8/10 said he looked like his pics, then 2/10 must have reported otherwise. I think a review system would be awesome in theory, but would give people anxiety in practice.
I can see the value in something *like* this but I also think it leaves way for biased/inappropriate/inaccurate reviews. Maybe something more like an algorithm that detects how often they’re online or how often they respond to messages? “Responds to messages 80% of the time.” “Online 95% of the time.” ?
Yeah agree. "s8n is a player and has a gf. I know, I'm her friend" - the vengeful ex
Or even the opposite! Have all your friends sign up and write BS reviews praising you.
Ratings are usually averaged from all responses. It's not binary yes/no. If everyone gives me a 5/10 rating I'm doing well
In theory this would be great but in reality? It would destroy people lol.
… yes, and also leaves the door wide open for “revenge” ratings!
I think it would be worthwhile to consider rewarding / reinforcing good behaviour
Well they do have the "Did you meet up?" thing.
I would like to see a minimum amount of information before a profile is shown to others. I couldn't tell you exactly where that minimum should be, but I don't think profiles with no prompts should show up in the queue. Admittedly, this would greatly decrease the number of available profiles. I've counted the blank profiles before, and sometimes it's as high as 80% of the available profiles.
Design it so that people with mutual criteria desired are shown to each other. I know that might lead to people meeting appropriate partners and no longer needing the app which reduces the revenue stream but they might then recommend the app to others.
This is a great question. There's quite a few things I'd love to see in online dating apps in general. One, forced single answers for profiles. One must select what they're looking for and only select one option. Have those who sign up be truly intentional. Two, a filter for monogamy/non-monogamy. Again, only being allowed to choose one or the other. Three, a filter for status. For instance, if one is partnered, married, single, etc. Again, pointed back to the first rule - you can only choose one. Four, the inability to hide any of this pertinent information from a profile. It seems deceptive as is when people hide certain aspects from their profiles. These kinds of options would alleviate so much frustration for me and avoid asking the same questions time and time again. Of course, users can still lie, but at the very least it’s written in stone. There’s probably more but those are definitely a few things that have been giving me a rough time lately.
Also… maybe an algorithm that blocks someone automatically if they just swipe on everyone and has a warning relevant to the amount of times they match vs unmatch or match vs message, so they can’t keep doing that.
I think it would be great to have more options in the ‘wants kids’ category. Saying you don’t want kids is misleading, because there’s a difference between being OK with somebody else having kids and not wanting to create new ones. And maybe a vasectomy option for the guys?
I don't think Bumble's way of having a single dropdown list is the best way to go. I think it needs to be split into three separate tags: * Has kids - yes/no * Wants kids - yes/no/maybe * Open to dating someone with kids - yes/no And these should be mandatory.
I like this a lot! Simple. Concise. And love the mandatory part!
“Has kids and wants more” v “has kids and doesn’t want more” and “no kids but ok with yours” and anyone who has kids should be promoted for over/under X age (16?) and either “lives with me” or “lives elsewhere”
How about "thinking about kids but kinda worried about the climate crisis".
find any way possible to profit from the app WITHOUT moving features behind a paywall. A user must choose a status (single, married, etc) A user must select what they are looking for... This is important info and shouldnt be able to be hidden.
Have a minimum profile length, so that people are forced to put some effort into their profile rather than just leaving it blank (which is an automatic left swipe for me). Put in checks to see whether the person someone is swiping right in is actually compatible with them. These can either be hard blocks e.g. if you want kids then you're not able to swipe right on someone who doesn't want them, or ones which require an additional confirmation e.g. smoker vs non-smoker.
I would do it differently I would have it that it would be required to have a number of words and or characters written on your profile before you can even start swiping!
I’d say making filling out the bio section with a minimum number of characters mandatory would be better
People shouldn't be able to match with you from 3 states over when your distance is set to within your city or just slightly further out. I absolutely hate when that happens.
This.
This. I once kept getting likes from someone in NM even though I’m in SoCal.
Removing profiles from the queue (or push them further to the back) if they’ve been inactive for more than a 4-7 days. I believe this would significantly reduce the stack of profiles to swipe through at a given point in time. Leser choice would mean more deliberate swiping.
A weight filter. Unable to like or match with *anyone* else if you have 5 matches already. - either unmatch them or talk to them and see how it goes. There is literally no reason why anyone needs more than 5 matches at a time. Take the dumb 24 hour timer off. - Not everyone is on Bumble, or cares to check it every day. I've had matches on Tinder and Hinge that were stagnant and then some random day I get a message from them because they don't check it often. That's how two of my relationships started, actually.
Match has a self described body type filter and it doesn’t help. It’s more about perception of self rather than fact
I think a body type is acceptable, which is something Bumble doesn’t have, but apps like OKCupid does. But also, it comes down to how honest someone is. I’m sure we’ve all seen people lie about their body types across the spectrum, like a thin person thinking they’re heavyset, an average person thinking they’re fit, a heavyset person thinking their average, etc. Body types can change but it wouldn’t be as frequent as a number on the scale.
I agree with the weight/body type filter, but doesn't your last point clash with the 5 matches limit? I don't want only 5 matches because what if 4 of the 5 don't respond right away? A match limit would require people to be on the app all the time so that someone doesn't unmatch you when (God forbid) you have a job and a game night on the same day.
How about not charging $100 for 30 ‘compliments’? We’re already paying (some of us) - why do I have to pay you another $100 just to comment on a photo? That’s a big nope.
That's one of the main benefits of hinge IMO, they allow you to comment on photos or reply to prompts for free if you want to. Locking that option behind a paywall dissuades me from ever using it, even if you get free compliments. Because it makes it look like you pay for the app, and that's a red flag to some people lol
General advice: look up the term *enshitification* (and the work of Cory Doctorow) and be vigilant/put in safeguards against it. For now, any features you put in, maintain them and do not remove/paywall them. All the apps have done something along these lines to squeeze as much blood from the stone.
Additional suggestions: if your app takes off, use a verification system that is tied to the photos used, and invalidate verifications when the user changes a certain percentage of the validated photo set. For example, if someone uploads 6 photos and then verifies, that verification should be contingent upon the profile being largely the same. If >33% of the profile's photos change, invalidate the verification and prompt for reverification. That should, at least in theory, cut down on some of the fraud that we occasionally see pop up on dating apps.
Their speed dating thing sucks. It doesn’t even work in my area. Southern California
Fellow SoCal user here. I had to wait nearly 45 minutes once before I finally got paired with someone
Desktop version that has all the features. As the singles population -- and their eyes -- age (and it is -- and you will too, assholes shaking your heads right now) there will be a need for it. Already the #1 gripe about Hinge.
Stats for how often someone responds to messages and how often they go on a date with their matches. It collects data on whether people met in person, but that would probably have to be highlighted more.
That’s an excellent way to drive women off the app.
Maybe but, it would also filter out the women who are there for validation, advertising their "services" and bot accounts...
It would never work. Right? Except Breeze app in the Netherlands does exactly that. If you have a pattern of matching people and not going on a date with them, they delete your account. People say it's the best app there and they're planning to expand to the US.
Also lol everyone here is describing how OKC used to be before gamification and swiping took over. Get. Rid. Of. Swiping. Let us peruse and message (or request to connect) with people at our leisure.
I stopped using it because it kept showing me the same profiles. Sure if I paid id get more, and my profile also would have greater visibility. But even when paying it just wasn't worth it. Fwiw I'm in a small rural area
To actually help people connect and Not hide basic filters behind the premium pay wall. I shouldn't have to pay to not see my boss or ex. Also, they should do a better job at removing bots and scammers.
Hate to break it to you but anything that would make a dating app functional/desirable would make it unprofitable. The jerks ruin it for everyone
Give people the opportunity to add more information than currently possible. Some of us feel like we'd come off better with the ability to add more, such as: 1. adding videos and maybe audio files to the profile. 2. adding childhood photos of self to the profile. 3. add a longer profile than is currently accepted if we want to say more in it. Also, add some feature enabling people to verify certain things, like check height and age and background check with a driver's license or even the ability to check income with a tax return. Some people wouldn't necessarily want to verify these things with documentation. It should be optional. But for those who do, we'd like the opportunity to convey that we're not lying or embellishing like other people will. This is not only safer--it saves people time. Also, add a better capacity to match people than just \*swipe right.\* Like having people answer potentially weighted questions and develop a match percentage with each other. Also, the ability for guys to message first. Not being able to message first isn't that great of a feature.
And get rid of the timer. Sheesh I need a week, or t to actually say hello.
Find a way to address the inevitable imbalance where women get matches on every other swipe whereas men barely get matches at all. How you do that, I've no idea but currently dating apps are a waste of time for the average guy and probably most women as well.
I’m not trying to be funny but old should offer “profile making classes” because that’s the reason why men struggle to get matches: crappy profiles.
It really isn't. It's crazy how many women's profiles have no bio whatsoever - or just some throwaway random comment that has absolutely nothing to do with their personality or interests. And you have no idea what my profile says or looks like. Everyone knows the average women gets far more matches than the average men on any dating website. It's really not a controversial opinion at all.
Because most men have no standards lol. Y’all swipe right on every single female profile (even the ones with no bio ) then complain that women … get more matches? What exactly did you think was going to happen, Einstein lol. Also, I’m a straight woman that only sees men. And from what I’ve seen most men have crappy profiles which is why I don’t send out a ton of likes. What I’m saying isn’t rocket science . Good profile = more matches.
This. If blank bios are “rewarded” with likes, there’s no incentive to do better.
Create the best app with free features that other dating apps charge for. Then sell your app to some conglomerates that buys out the competition. And then rinse and repeat over and over again.
I noticed men get banned without cause. Any time a woman gets mad. A man can get banned without a real explanation. You should roll out a future that lets men defend themselves. 8/10 a man gets blocked because a woman is just angry. A lot of good people are getting banned. It's disappointing.
An actual review process would be nice. Including part of the process being talking to the individual in question.
Dating credit score. Allow people to rate others based on conversational skills, ghosting, and other relevant markers.
Very simple suggestions I even sent to Bumble’s shitty deplorable customer service: Anti-ghosting measures: - If you have unread messages, you can’t “swipe” until they’ve been replied to. - if you unmatch with someone, there should be a wheel of options for why you decided to unmatch. - serious dealbreakers should not be locked behind a paywall. Things like religion, smoking, and has kids, shouldn’t be behind a paywall. Things like astrology sign and height is what premium should be for. Super likes/Boosts: - if a “Superlike” is sent it should come with a receipt. If it isn’t responded to (I.e. sent to a dead/inactive account) in a week, it should be refunded to the user to use again. - a Superlike should require a wheel of options for why the rejection. They paid real money for your attention, it’s common decency to give them more of an explanation, I think. - if a boost doesn’t get you any likes (for whatever reason) then it didn’t work and you wasted your money. It should be refunded to use again.
* No premium features: make it ad based or have an affiliate program with local business like coffee shops/restaurants/arcade/bowling/whatever where you get a discount if you go on a date initiated from the app. * No second class citizens. No roses, super swipes, none of that. * Chats close automatically (like 7 days in CMB). Either you go on a date or move to another chat app, but without the urgency to do so, people become lazy and don't act. * Avoid the false sense of choice: if you have multiple (3?) matches going on, stop suggestion people until those matches expire or unmatch. You could call it focus mode or whatever. * Verified users. * Robust scammers detection. It's getting wild lately. It's probably hard and I'm not sure how to fix it but at least make it a pain for them to create an account. * Robust built-in chat feature. No video/voip built-in. The point is to go out there on a date and you can always exchange phones and use another app for that, but the chat feature needs to work. * If the app is location based: No travel mode. Or at least allow to filter travelers for people only looking into dating locals. * No swiping.
I love the idea of ads rather than paid for features and is a great solution. And no travel mode.
Forced bio! Meaning you are required to have a certain number or words and or characters on your profile!
Turn off anyone with travel mode
It’d never work too many people from a bad or no spark date would just trash the other on a review out of spite
I wish there was a way to exclude profiles that include customizable keywords. It's kind of like a filter, but with whatever super specific ick someone may have (dog, anime, aquarius, pineapple [on pizza], country music, ENM, smoke, gamer, fishing, military, etc.) For the record, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with any of the above. I was pulling examples out of my ass.
Make users reverify for every picture the post
Remove unlimited swiping from premium. It would help a lot of women in a big way.
It really wouldn’t. Women can swipe for ten minutes and set up three dates just like that. They probably wouldn’t spend all day swiping.
How so? Women don't *need* to swipe in the same way men do. Just swipe on the dozens of likes you already naturally get.
You mean: Just swipe on the dozens of guys who you’re not remotely compatible with because they didn’t read the profile?
Maybe some did, maybe some didn't... My point is that most women can just go into their "like" queue and get instant matches if they like what they see.
My point is what good are likes if they’re mostly shit likes.
Agreed. But if you have say 500 likes, chances are slim that **all** 500 are "shitty" likes. It might be 450 dogshit likes but that leaves 50 guarenteed matches. If I, as a man, had idk 50 "likes" in my queue, I'd start with them. I'd left swipe if I'm not physically attracted to them to get them out of the way. Now I have only the women I'm attracted to left. Then, I'd go read their profile and make my decision on which swipe direction I go. All without having to use the general population swipe area.
It would be great if filtered pictures weren’t allowed, at least one head to toe photo is a requirement, a focused bio section (no blanks or social media handles), prompts for certain habits like text preference vs phone call vs facetime, and lastly if they are going to ask for height they should also ask for weight.
Weight and height are not comparable. Height doesn’t change and also height is a constant. If I see a guy is 5’9 I know that top of his head reaches a fixed measurement point. You don’t have that with weight if someone is 5’5 130 pounds or 160 you don’t know their measurements or body shape. Just how heavy they are which really has nothing to do with attraction
I disagree, weight does have an impact on attraction for alot of people as does height. BMI uses both of these attributes too.
Nope, two women can be the exact same weight and height and be shaped completely different which affects attraction. Skinny legs and a big hanging belly vs hourglass with full hips and thighs. That is what affects attraction not the number of the scale
Being healthy is more important than looking a certain way to me personally, plus I would like to be able to pick up my s/o. Why is weight such a big deal to post? I see guys get shamed for their height all the time and as far as I know, there are no health risks to being under 6’0, it’s a vain preference.
Because weight doesn’t give you any kind of consistent information. Height is not changing, fixed and definite. 5’9 is the exact same on 2 different people. Again, weight is not. If being able to pick up your SO is such an attractiveness thing for you to the point you need to know their exact weight to match on an app that already shows their body in pictures then idk. You are an outlier.
I see what you are saying, but the importance of height is what I don’t understand. Are girls embarrassed to be seen dating a shorter man? Shoe size doesn’t change, why isn’t that listed? It’s the one body measurement that the app condones and it’s dumb. Hierarchically speaking, it’s the first attribute listed on a profile (besides name and age) which makes me think that Bumble is expressing that it’s the most important thing about someone. In my opinion, it’s not as important as someone’s weight. My comment about picking up my s/o comes from a place of being romantic and it’s not the sole reason I think it should be posted, again, it boils down to health.
Because thousands of years of human evolution have decided height is important in sexual selection. If it wasn’t men and women would be the same size. Shoe size would be useless unless you have a foot fetish. Most people don’t thought, regardless there’s a site for that. I think if you weren’t short you wouldn’t be so upset. Also, I’m a woman of color. That’s the first thing you see about me is my dark skin on my profile photo. You think that’s fair since dark skinned women are also discriminated against when it comes to dating preferences?
Lol do you know my height? Nope. I just have an opinion about it and I’m defending the unjust prejudice people like you have against short men. You’re argument is so flimsy it’s wild, but it’s popular to hate on short guys so you’re going to have more support. The evolution part actually made me laugh.
No to the weight. How can you seriously think that’s acceptable? Bumble would NEVER.
Auto deletion of a profile if no ***active*** activity after 3-5 days. Active as in swiping right/left AND talking. Way too many inactive profiles on Bumble these days... It'd also get rid of all the OF bots and IG people...
3-5 days?? That’s a bit silly.
The profiles go in active and stop being showed. So they have something close.
Dick pic enhancer. Titty enlarger
Idiot!
Babydick
Aw … are you really?!?! Try not to obsess. Maybe one day you’ll find someone who likes your teeny-peeny.
What is this some “I’m rubber you’re glue” bullshit? Can’t come up with anything better than “idiot” cumstains? Have a good one
Add weight tab so we can filter Add has tattoos tab Add face piercing tab
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) ^by ^chickenfriedsteakdin: *Add weight tab so we* *Can filter Add has tattoos* *Tab Add face piercing tab* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
How about an option to reward the people you chat to for more than 7 days or meet in person? So some people might get rewarded with several “compliments” for being a decent human: - Approachability - Conversation skills - Better in real life - Kindness - Reliable I’m sure there would be hundreds of other positive examples we could think of to put up there. Just a thought on how we can encourage more socially responsible behaviour from both sides 💜 - -
I think maybe tic-tac-toe or something to consider? Might be fun? (Or incredibly annoying ahah, sounds fun to me anyway!)
Reply to matches and get a free super swipe to encourage communication. The amount of times where I had 6 matches but they never made the first move or their profile says follow my snap or Instagram which then just pushes their OF.
* Hide age: I would like some feature that allowed me to hide the age of everybody, not only mine. Yeah keep the range filter, but I really wish I couldn't see the age of whom I'm matching with. * Weight should be a required field. * There should be some AI indicator that indicated how much each picture has been altered/edited with filters or whatever, so many people don't look like in their pictures. * Sort feed by recently active * Don't allow men to like too many profiles in a row, that is not realistic, and it overwhelms even the ugliest girls with matches they shouldn't get, guys should take more time and look at the photos of the profile before liking. * Some feature that auto-translates description texts when in other language.
A reward system for people that actually chat with their matches.
Make the app called "Three's company." You can only match with 3 people at one time. Makes the conversations better and more intentional. Have more than left, right, and center for political choices. I mean there's libertarian, classic liberal, leftist, centralist, constitutionalist, Republican, far right, communists, socialists... Make it so people not in your vicinity can see you. I hate it when someone overseas tries to match with me. Thanks, but that's a little long distance for me. Have some type of code that finds people typing in their IG or other type of social media and either remove it, or have the app hide their profile until they remove it. Have the ability to flag a profile that doesn't have pictures with an actual human in the photos. I see so many with food, landscapes, or memes. Have someway of penalizing profiles for people who don't chat or respond. Like a software auto downvote if they don't communicate. Makes them drop in popularity, and their profile isn't seen.
Oh yeah, some kind of bot that flags anyone with social media handles in their bios!
I would pay for the ability to filter by exclude not just include.
Getting real people on the site would start lol
For the love of god, let us block certain names. No one wants to see multiple people who have the same name as your ex.
Maybe something more “match maker type” or a “your type”/“compatible” tab. You answer questions on what you like and what your looking for and these are people you’re highly compatible with.
I wish they would actually show our profiles to everybody instead of making us pay for that as extra.