The policy discriminates against those deemed less attractive for whatever reason (bad photo, profile misspelling, etc.).
Heaven forbid people are rewarded for being liked! Shouldn't a bad photo or a misspelling count against you?
The policy reinforces the notion that hot people deserve love and happiness and "ugly" people should just get used to being alone.
What does attractiveness mean if not that people like to look at you more? It would be weird for a dating site not to respond to this dynamic.
...we've all got different preferences when it comes to physical attractiveness, and just because someone hasn't gotten as many click-thrus as someone else doesn't mean that users won't find that person attractive.
Interesting. I wonder if HotOrNot can tell you what the correlation among user ratings is (i.e. whether an 8 is more likely to be seen as an 8 or a 2). I would be pretty surprised if the 8's were just as likely to be seen as 2's by a random viewer.
OkCupid is segregating the groups, which seems counter-productive to, you know, DATING.
Really? If you're in a dating mood, you don't look for specific kinds of people? I doubt this. If you're actively looking for mates, you'll still write off >90% of the people you see on a daily basis (count how many people you walk past who are within 10 years of your age, a member of the sex you're attracted to, and not--by your guess--currently romantically attached).
I used to think that the problem with calling prejudice "discrimination" was that it rid us of a serviceable word. But it's worse than that: now, we're rid of a serviceable concept, too. Suddenly, discrimination--making judgments about how things differ--is also a problem.
Heaven forbid people are rewarded for being liked! Shouldn't a bad photo or a misspelling count against you?
The policy reinforces the notion that hot people deserve love and happiness and "ugly" people should just get used to being alone.
What does attractiveness mean if not that people like to look at you more? It would be weird for a dating site not to respond to this dynamic.
...we've all got different preferences when it comes to physical attractiveness, and just because someone hasn't gotten as many click-thrus as someone else doesn't mean that users won't find that person attractive.
Interesting. I wonder if HotOrNot can tell you what the correlation among user ratings is (i.e. whether an 8 is more likely to be seen as an 8 or a 2). I would be pretty surprised if the 8's were just as likely to be seen as 2's by a random viewer.
OkCupid is segregating the groups, which seems counter-productive to, you know, DATING.
Really? If you're in a dating mood, you don't look for specific kinds of people? I doubt this. If you're actively looking for mates, you'll still write off >90% of the people you see on a daily basis (count how many people you walk past who are within 10 years of your age, a member of the sex you're attracted to, and not--by your guess--currently romantically attached).
I used to think that the problem with calling prejudice "discrimination" was that it rid us of a serviceable word. But it's worse than that: now, we're rid of a serviceable concept, too. Suddenly, discrimination--making judgments about how things differ--is also a problem.