Attacking the questions? Be careful...

Okay, folks. We all know that some of eHarmony's questions are really stupid.

And it can be tempting to dismiss stupid questions.

The problem? It rarely works well.

Yes, it can be a lot of fun to come up with witty retorts to stupid questions. But, often, those witty retorts make you look like you're trying too hard to answer a simple question.

It can make you look more evasive. Less genuine. And, usually, less idealizable.

They tend to break the "fourth wall" of having an intimate conversation.

And, if a woman has invested effort into choosing a question, she may see your dismissal as a personal rejection of her values.

Now, I'm not saying that "attacking the question" has no place in anyone's toolbox. If you feel like you're being treated like a doormat, or you're being asked an offensive question, this may be your best response.

But, in those cases - you're already fighting a losing battle. And your response may only serve to let you leave with head held high.

And, a lot of times, that's a good reason.

Be a profile critic.... You could win a personal consultation

As I've mentioned, I'll soon be opening the doors on my consultation business.

And I'm giving you a chance to be my first customer. For free.

And even if you don't win the consultation... you'll STILL be a winner.

How can you win?

Here's how it works:

1. Join the google group. You're going to have to talk to your fellow readers to compete in this one, folks.
2. Write an email to me at the address listed at the top of this blog. Use a subject line of "GROUP OF FIVE".
3. I'll start a discussion on the Google Group for your "Group of five". You'll be randomly assigned to join four of your fellow readers.
   
4. Post your eHarmony profile to your "Group of five" thread.
5. Once you've put your profile on the chopping block... provide your BEST feedback to your fellow "Group of five" members.
6. I'll let the threads go on for at least two weeks.
7. In each group of five, I'll pick a "winner", based on the quality of the criticism they provide, and how much I feel they've improved by participating in the process. And, yes, my decision is both subjective and final.
8. I reserve the right to advance "wildcard" winners in the competition, at my convenience and selection. (Mostly to make sure that the semi-final and final groups have 5 members.)
   
9. The winners of each "group of five" round will be placed in NEW groups of five, consisting of other winners.
10. The process repeats... until we have a winner.
11. Yes, you can post comments to groups other than your group of five. (Or, even if you're not a "group of five" member.) But you won't advance in the competition for doing it.
    

So, even if you don't win the competition - you'll still be getting some great feedback from your fellow members. And the more you help others (and respond to the help offered to you)... the better help you're going to receive.

And the winner? Will get a personal consultation on the subject of their choosing.

Want me to give my personal criticism of your profile? Fine.

Got another sticking point you'd like to talk about? I'm all ears.

And, like I said... my personal consultations won't come cheap, folks. You're looking at an over $200 value here.

So, get crackin' folks. And I'll see you on the Google Group.

Don't get caught by the Halo Effect...

Seduction artists have long commented on something called "The Halo Effect". A fancy social psychological term for something that, on one level, seems pretty obvious. When we see other people responding to it, that is.

And, once in awhile, you find a classic example of the "Halo effect" in action. Take a look at this article, especially the comments.

In the beginning, she looks like she's a typical woman carrying the banner of those who say they've been "rejected by eHarmony".

But, she is attractive. She makes a living as a model. And, so the halo effect begins.

And it's funny how so many people rallied to her defense. And they don't only comment upon how crazy eHarmony is to reject such an attractive woman. (As if they should be making exceptions for attractive women...)

They also talk about how "well-adjusted" and "intelligent" she is.

Now, wait a minute... did any of the commentators actually meet this woman?

Probably not. They're caught in the halo effect. They see one positive attribute, and assume that she is well-adjusted and intelligent.

Maybe she is. And, maybe, eHarmony's testing process made a mistake in her case.

And, maybe she isn't quite the catch that the commentators are making her out to be. I don't know. I've never met her.

Like I've said, it's easy to catch other people in the halo effect.

It's trickier to spot it in yourself.

Oh, and don't worry, commentators. There are other attractive women on eHarmony too.

A light moment for the 4th...

It's a holiday.

I don't have many readers on holidays, so I'm not going to say anything too profound.

In fact, I think I'll steal this from eHarmony Blog. But, they stole it from someone else who's blog disappeared. So I feel okay in copying it again.

Happy Independence Day, folks!

She doth protest too much, methinks...

Another thought that's somewhat related to this week's audio trainwreck...

Ever notice those profiles that are just a little too strident?

The ones that vociferously declare the woman's demands about needing to take care of children? Or demanding a respectful relationship? Or overstressing her religious faith?

Again, people who are confident aren't so strident. For example, I have run into a few rabbis on eHarmony, and I've reviewed the profiles of a few other people involved in religious service. They're content to demonstrate and imply their faith.

And they don't hammer folks over the head with their religiosity.

You guessed it - women who repeatedly insist on something, in my experience, either are covering a weakness, or are still dealing with some past problem.

In fact? Many of the slimier pick-up artists have commented upon how many of the women who insist on "respectful", "long-term", and "Christian" relationships, are, in fact, some of the easiest prey for them.

Scuzzy, yes. But the observation is probably accurate.

Keep it in mind, guys.

"Four times as much communication?" I wish...

For awhile, eHarmony has put up banner ads on it's site, in it's attempt to inform people about their ability to declare a preference for fast-track.

Actually, I'm pretty happy that they're trying to make fast-track requests seem more normal.

But, in these ads, they cite a statistic that caught me off-guard.

According to the ads, people who declare a fast-track preference receive four times as many communication requests!

I found that interesting. And it definitely contradicted my own data set.

So, I tried to find out more about the basis for eHarmony's claim.

It was difficult to find - but one article finally made it clear.

It explained that people who declare a fast-track preference receive four times as many fast-track requests than the people who don't.

That's a big difference, in my opinion. And it doesn't contradict my old data.

Of course, my old data has it's weaknesses. The experiment was done over a year ago. I didn't have that many matches in the data set.

And, recently, at least one member of our Google Group has introduced a reasonable theory that certain personality types might respond better to fast-track than guided communcation. And has some data backing up his theory, at least in his case.

But eHarmony's statistic? It's just not relevant to most men, in my humble opinion.

I still hold to my belief - attractive women are flooded with communication requests. They don't have the time to read profiles attached to men who aren't showing interest. And it's much better to be guy #3 to request communication, rather than guy #40.

Again, if a woman seems worth talking to, I recommend initiating communication quickly. Don't wait for her to initiate.

Time is not on your side.

"I don't play games." Starting when?

There's another point to be made from yesterday's audio train wreck...

Did you find it interesting, how, on the second message, he kept saying that he won't hang around with women who play games with him?

He even accused her of having mental illness - for not returning his first phone call?

Uh... right.

That's an extreme example, but guys do make mistakes similar to this.

Think about it for a moment.

Imagine that you have no problems finding fun and interesting women to meet. They're plentiful in your world.

Would you go into 20 minute lectures telling women that you won't put up with her if she plays games with you?

Would you get upset if she didn't return a phone call? Or insult her? Or make threats to cut her off forever?

Of course not. You'd just move on.

So... when guys do these things, they demonstrate the exact opposite of what they're saying.

Me? I just follow my two strike rule.

And, when they hit two strikes? I don't threaten or blow up.

I just stop calling. And move on to meet women who are eager to talk.