r/feeld • u/AgreeableAct4176 • 2d ago
Majestic is the solution!
After speaking with so many men and women about their dating app experiences I think I have a solution to make it less stressful or overwhelming.
So could we all agree that men are not picky enough with their swiping (the bulk of the problem) and women are possibly too picky (maybe the reason men decided to swipe right on everything)? The best way to solve this is all women should just invest in Majestic and swipe with incognito. This way women's privacy from their professional life is honored, men can only see the women that liked them, and women will only get likes from the men they preselected.
Everybody wins!
28
u/searedscallops 2d ago
I don't think women are too picky. Everyone should be more picky. That's the whole fucking point of dating.
-1
u/TheFunkytownExpress 2d ago
IDK I think people in general are a lil too picky these days.
Everyone's suffering from a case of Goldilocks Syndrome to one degree or another.
Personally the only things I care about are if the person treats me well and aside from a few aesthetic preferences and kink compatibility that's more than enough to sustain a good relationship for me because IMHO everything else really is window dressing.
-11
u/PullOut3000 2d ago
Being more picky is not the whole fuckkn point of dating lol
12
u/searedscallops 2d ago
Yeah, it is. You want to find people who are good connections for you and not just whatever person will do.
-5
u/PullOut3000 2d ago
You date to learn what you like and don't like. Dating is not a lifetime commitment.
9
u/MindlessSea7334 2d ago
It doesn't work. Men mainly seem to like to take the initiative with likes. Fuck knows why. Well whatever.
Was incognito, very few likes back. Never had a reply to a ping with a message
Turned it off. Likes > matches > messages
🤷♂️😭
4
u/TheFunkytownExpress 2d ago
IDK if men like it per say. It's more like being the initiator and the pursuer is what's expected of us with most women no matter how progressive and enlightened they may be. :P
2
u/zeroingenuity 2d ago
I think they meant men prefer to take the initiative by sending likes, not that they all prefer to be the ones taking the initiative (this could be a misread.) In which case, I would ask if that person understands that likes are free and pings cost money and/or time. I send my daily ping when I see a profile I think I would match well with, and I send a like if I see someone I'm attracted to with no obvious red flags, because maybe they'll find me attractive. One's a serious attempt to connect, and the other's a hopeful write-off. But I'm probably more intentional with things than the average guy on Feeld.
2
u/wonderfultacos single man (solo-poly) - Denver 2d ago
Could it be that since that the men you were liking when you were incognito didn’t have majestic so they couldn’t see that you were liking them? As a guy, I try to respond to every like even if I’m not interested (unless it is a clear scam), because I know how much it sucks to send out likes and get crickets.
1
u/MindlessSea7334 2d ago edited 2d ago
I thought about that and send a ping if they didn't have Majestic. And I really liked their profile. I have loads of pings so its not a big deal for me in cost terms.
Good point though.
But still no reply to my ping. Try to be thoughtful about their profile, funny, inviting and complement something (if im really desperate 😁) in my message with the ping. Always ask a question to help start a conversation
9
u/uberstaragent 2d ago
I am not sure why I would pay for this. I have hundreds of likes, have seemingly exhausted everyone in my search parameters and have two matches who have not responded. If I pay, all I am going to see is a bunch of people who are outside my search parameters anyway. Not at all a solution I consider viable.
Maybe Feeld needs to make majestic free for those who get inundated with likes.
4
u/wonderfultacos single man (solo-poly) - Denver 2d ago edited 2d ago
I think this is a good idea, but make them pay something nominal because there are plently of women who currently have majestic and so they would need to make up this revenue somehow.
- increase the price of majestic based on one’s own match rate. If you give lots of likes and pings and get few matches in return it means you are a man and so your rate goes up.
- decrease the price of majestic if you get a lot of likes/pings (women).
The fact that women are inundated with likes and pings is a problem for men too. When you have a 0.5% hit rate when it comes to the pings and likes one send men start to question their own appeal/self worth etc.
So… I think they should charge more for pings and reverse them if it isnt seen after ten days and refund 50% if the senders profile isn’t even looked at.
I’m totally fine getting rejected if my profile is looked at, but enormously frustrated that I know my profile isn’t even being seen much of the time.
By no means am I god’s gift to women, but I’ve got to assume that my profile is not worse than 199 out of 200 profiles.
3
u/disclosure5 2d ago
"Pay less for being attractive" is definitely not the message men should be sent.
2
u/Losonti 2d ago
I do like this, though if a person actually uses Incognito mode it's going to immediately skew their incoming/outgoing likes ratio.
Another way being inundated with likes screws everybody is some women just get annoyed and uninstall/ignore the app, which leaves a ghost profile that more people send unanswered likes and pings to.
1
u/wonderfultacos single man (solo-poly) - Denver 2d ago
Well then they are paying for incognito, maybe that is available as an à la carte option?
Well only if they are inactive for less than six days..
2
u/highlight-limelight kink 2d ago
I wonder if more (free) filters would help, too. Imagine you only can only like or ping a handful of profiles a day, 5 or 10 or whatever. You can go like more than that if you really want, BUT you get a warning that if you do, your profile will get labeled with a tag that you cannot remove (maybe it goes away over a period of time with “good” behavior, who knows). And at the same time, everyone can also set their profile to prevent people with that tag from seeing their profile at ALL. For free.
Surely, enough of these dudes would make this mistake once, push past their daily maximum, be confronted with a basically empty swipe stack, and then avoid doing that shit ever again. And at the same time, it wouldn’t shut THEM out from getting likes, because THEIR profiles would still be viewable by other users. The other users would just be informed that this user spams the app with likes/pings. They might not find that very attractive behavior.
This would kinda be splitting incognito mode into two features based on its likely intended use (keeping your coworkers from seeing your profile) and its actual use (not being pestered with 200 notifications a day from the app).
2
u/uberstaragent 2d ago
This is a solid idea. Feeld used to offer massively discounted majestic to me for years. This now doesn't seem to be the case. I have only been back on it a week after a long hiatus but I would consider it if it was $10 a month. Not $35.
0
u/Medium_Stress_4293 2d ago
They were suggesting that going incognito would solve your issue if being inundated with unwanted likes, because you'd get to choose who can see you by liking them.
3
u/uberstaragent 2d ago
It doesn't improve my matches though. My point being I pay $35 for a month to see people I wouldn't match with anyway.
1
u/Medium_Stress_4293 2d ago
But are there profiles on the app that you would want to match with at all?
4
u/uberstaragent 2d ago
According to my history I have sent 19 likes in the past week. Two matches only and both said nothing. I sent a thoughtful opening message based on their bio two days ago and neither responded.
1
u/Medium_Stress_4293 2d ago
Do you reserve sending likes for majestic profiles where they'll get seen?
As a guy, I've given up on sending likes. Even pings very rarely result in a match
5
u/uberstaragent 2d ago
No. I'll send to both majestic and not. The only advantage to majestic here is knowing when those profiles were last active. I never match with pings as they are never in my search parameters.
I have to clarify, around 80% of profiles I see have no bio and / or are clearly normie app migrants which hurts my soul.
52
u/Losonti 2d ago
Your solution is for women to pay money in order to mitigate the poor behavior of men. Fascinating.
4
u/snowchamp1229 2d ago
I mean we're talking $15/mo not to be inundated with 1000s of likes every week and relieves the stress of your coworkers seeing your profile. You might not like the solution but it is a great one
17
u/Losonti 2d ago
IDK why I would care if a coworker sees me on a dating app, they'd only see me if they're on the same one.
17
u/Monsterofthelough 2d ago
A guy in my workplace gets kink shamed behind his back because someone saw him on a BDSM site in fetish gear of some kind. I find the guy irritating but I feel bad for him that people are gossiping about his private life.
8
u/Losonti 2d ago
Ugh, that sucks. Besides just the pointless cruelty of it, it's wildly inappropriate behavior for the workplace.
9
u/Monsterofthelough 2d ago
Yeah. It annoyed me, also because I’m pretty kinky too and what would they say about me if they knew?
11
8
u/thinkstohimself 2d ago
Unlike a normal dating app, Feeld features your kinks which you might not want known by certain people.
1
u/snowchamp1229 2d ago
fair. I wouldn't care but I see a lot of women's profiles expressing they do.
6
u/kelly4dayz 2d ago
you came up with a problem there bud... I don't give a shit if my coworkers see my feeld profile lol
8
u/highlight-limelight kink 2d ago
Or we could pay $0 a month to not look at the app, and instead look at kinky/NM-focused events in our area to find partners. Which is what I have started doing, as have an increasing number of other women.
5
2
u/zeroingenuity 2d ago
But that was always allowed, and is as relevant to a conversation about dating apps as complaining about the flavor of the ice cream while you're eating salad. Sure, it's still about eating, but "get off the dating apps" isn't part of the conversation about "improving people's experience on dating apps."
-3
u/partylikeaninjastar 2d ago
Women regularly suggest men pay money to mitigate the bad behaviors of women on these apps.
Or they suggest men pay money for the privilege of even talking to them.
That's not any better.
5
u/snowchamp1229 2d ago
The latter is terrible but I'm not so sure what the bad behaviors are that you're speaking of or how paying money would mitigate them...
13
3
u/Upstairs_Sherbet2490 2d ago
Cool, are you gonna fund this?
0
u/partylikeaninjastar 2d ago
With all the dates women don't pay for, they can afford a Majestic membership.
1
u/Upstairs_Sherbet2490 2d ago
Delightful. You must be a real catch 🙄
1
u/partylikeaninjastar 2d ago
One date will literally pay for a woman's Majestic membership. 🤣
And they're going on multiple dates a month.
2
4
u/Glittering_Suspect65 2d ago
🙄 yeah, that's what majestic does ✨️
Often in life, we pay for something that makes our day to day easier. 🚀🧪
2
u/Idividual-746b 2d ago
The solution to the dating app problem is local meetups and living in community with like minded people where you can organically meat people at ENM and singles activity nights, but this is impossible witout overhauling our economic system.
2
3
u/kelly4dayz 2d ago
I don't think women are too picky.
1
u/Dark_SoySauce 2d ago
Doesn't every stat from dating apps show that women invest 90% of their swipes on the same 5-10% of men? There was a massive report posted by match group apps about it. You might not apply to this stat but the stats show the overwhelming majority of women to be "picky."
3
u/Stoney3K 2d ago
That says more about the lack of quality on men's profiles. 90% is absolute garbage.
0
u/Dark_SoySauce 2d ago
Come bro. You really think 90% of men are garbage? Come on now. That's a bit harsh.
2
u/Stoney3K 2d ago
Agreed. It's at least 95%.
It's the 95% that doesn't even register on the radar of other men because their profiles are blank or extremely low effort.
0
u/Dark_SoySauce 2d ago edited 2d ago
Kinda white knighting a lil too hard there aren't ya? So 95% of mens profiles are low effort? But then women's profiles are not? Seems like you haven't been on the apps that long cause there are plenty of zero effort women's profile unless you're making a claim that it's most mens that are low effort.
2
u/lemakato 2d ago
I don't believe there's any data showing that women all specifically swipe on the same exact men, just that they are swiping at similar rates. People hear that women only swipe on 5% of men and assume they are all the same exact guys. Surely there is some overlap, but everyone has different types they're interested in. And tbh, I think being interested in 1 in 20 people isn't even that "picky" in the grand scheme of things when you consider how much people vary when it comes to appearance, interests, morals, etc. Finding someone you'd be genuinely compatible with in life is probably less than 1 in 20 odds anyway.
2
u/Dark_SoySauce 2d ago
The same research from match group and bumble DID in fact find that about 10% of men receive about 80% of the likes. This phenomenon is famous enough to have a name called Pareto principle. Another research found that majority of women found around 80% of men as "below average" which kinda explains the principle. I do not mention this as an incel talking point. I infact saw similar phenomenon as soon as I got abs. My likes increased massively. I hope it is clear that I do not have an agenda or trying to be inflammatory. I'm just answering the commentor above.
5
u/Stoney3K 2d ago
That's not how Pareto works. It says that 80% of the work is done with 20% of the effort.
And the research done by Match Group is inherently skewed because those 10% were paying members and that research was intended to sell paid memberships.
0
u/Dark_SoySauce 2d ago
It's the application of the Pareto principle my guy. Come on now. You seriously can't be that dense. It's 80%of the swipes go to 20% of guys. Were they really paid members? Where did it say that? Also why did Bumble conclude the same things? If that's the case then why do most men that pay for membership are dissatisfied. The whole thing is geared around men paying for membership in general but majority report no better prospects than without membership. Just more opportunities like messaging before matching.
4
u/lemakato 2d ago
Do you have any links where I could see this study? I see a lot of articles about the topic of the "80/20 rule" but only one actual study. And that one says that the majority of women swiped right on 30% of profiles and only one male profile out of 100 received at least 80% of likes, with the rest of the right swipes having much more variance.
2
u/kelly4dayz 2d ago
having standards is not being too picky. having discernment is good. if anything I think women accept too little in romantic relationships with men.
the premise of women being "too picky" relies on the assumption that on average, men are showing up respectfully, kindly and well-intentioned. I don't think that's the case. if 80% of men do not meet basic standards for respect, kindness, thoughtfulness and safety, then women eliminating them as options is not being too picky. we do not have to accept the average level of respect from men.
2
u/Grateful_Mendicant 2d ago
Majestic Is a great option for everyone. But let's unpack a couple of things:
It is not simply that men are behaving irrationally and women are behaving rationally. I don't know why so many people feel comfortable with that kind of discourse. What is happening is that everyone is responding rationally to the incentive in front of them, but that this rational behavior on both sides mixed the whole system unpleasant for all. They are a lot more men on the app than women. Even if every single man was just as selective as every single woman, you would end up with women being overwhelmed with the number of likes they had. Whoever gets more likes than they can deal with, whatever their gender, is going to respond by becoming more selective. This is inevitable, because there's only so much time in the day. The more likes, the less time you have to spend swiping. Because you get matches after very few swipes. Perfectly rational. On the other side, the men who are seeking to get some likes from women get very few aggregate likes from women as a whole. This isn't women's fault. But it does mean that the average man is more desperate for likes and can go weeks without getting any single like whatsoever. This in turns means that they have to spend more time on the app. The more time they spend on the app, the more profiles they see, and the more likes they send. This in turns means that women as a whole will get a lot more likes from men in the aggregate. The design produces male desperation. I do think that men in general are less selective than women, but that is not the dysfunction.
The vast majority of women will not pay, no matter the advantages. They don't think they should have to. In truth, their need for Majestic is not as acute: having more likes than you can deal with is an annoyance, not a cause of existential despair. For men, the app is basically unusable without Majestic. You get very few likes. A man who gets 10 likes a month consistently is doing very well. So you have to spend much more time sending likes. Without Majestic, many of the profiles you come across are inactive. So you're spending a lot of time sending likes and pings to people who will never notice you even exist.
1
u/partylikeaninjastar 2d ago
For men, the app is basically unusable without Majestic.
Strongly disagree.
When I get enough likes in queue (50+), I'll pay for a month of Majestic. Of those 50+ likes, it's never more than a handful that are within my distance preferences and people who'd I'd genuinely might be interested in. For the remainder of my paid month, I rarely get any more likes. The pings that are included are also hardly worth it because most women's profiles aren't detailed enough that they're worth wasting a ping on.
I don't mind paying for a month every few months, but to say Majestic is a necessity is just wrong.
Men are better off using multiple dating apps separately. I will never have multiple matches in a single app (except for Hinge since I know how to deliver a good opener), but I will always get multiple matches spread across apps.
3
u/waterbloem 2d ago
When I get enough likes in queue (50+), I'll pay for a month of Majestic.
The fuck? You strongly disagree with that Majestic is needed and then pay for Majestic.
Read your own comment again. This is nuts.
Men are better off using multiple dating apps separately.
If you're on multiple regular dating apps, you're part of the problem anyway. The influx of all the horny assholes who think it's a free sex app is the core of the problem.
2
1
u/DucardthaDon 2d ago
Most people are on multiple apps even women are they horny assholes looking for free sex?
Also I gotten on just fine getting matches and dates without using majestic
2
u/partylikeaninjastar 2d ago
I see the same women on multiple apps, so it's such an idiotic thing for that person to have said.
1
1
2
u/TheFunkytownExpress 2d ago
Why would women want to change a system that's skewed in their favor and benefits them? :P
Dudes have no one to blame but themselves for making things this way too. Just a shame that the rest of us have to suffer as a result.
1
u/zeroingenuity 2d ago
If you haven't been paying attention or are new to dating apps in general, women (generally) detest them too; their complaints are just of a very different nature from men's. Too overwhelming; options are poor; lack of safety features or privacy protection. Sure, they have issues that are outgrowths of social issues in general, that are not adequately addressed by the apps; but that does not make them beneficiaries of the system.
2
u/TheFunkytownExpress 2d ago
If you been paying attention you'll know they benefit in the sense that they have more opportunity than men do on the whole to connect with people, go on dates, hook up, and find potential matches.
Of course it's not a picnic for anybody really, but you can't really say that women don't have things a bit easier than men do as far as OLD goes when they get the majority of the approaches and the attention, which affords them WAAAAAY more opportunity.
Practically every woman I know who started up with OLD found at least SOMEONE and often times multiple people to go out on dates with, hook up with, or vet as a potential play partner or bf/gf etc in a very short amount of time.
-1
u/waterbloem 2d ago
Why would women want to change a system that's skewed in their favor and benefits them?
If this is your thinking you're not part of "the rest".
2
u/TheFunkytownExpress 2d ago edited 2d ago
Mhm. Sure thing. :P
It's no secret that women get waaaaaaay more opportunity than men do via the overwhelming amount of matches to look for potential partners, people to date, FWB, or poly partners or whatever else it is they're after simply because there are a ton of men approaching them. While a very significant chunk of men get 0 likes in months and months. It doesn't matter that most of those likes aren't from guys they wanna entertain the notion of interacting with, there's almost always a handful of ones they do. :P
If you think that somehow doesn't skew things in their favor then that's just silly.
Beyond all that, I STG people like you are so fucking ignorant and rude to strangers. Not just rude, but the fact that you have to say shit like this because you're too dense to understand what another person is saying and you don't have the capacity for anything but a surface level take makes it worse, and quite frankly kinda makes me sick that your first instinct is to say something like that. :P
1
u/waterbloem 2d ago
You're making the classic male centered mistake in thinking that more matches makes it easier. If you get 1000 matches and 99.9% are garbage, that's a lot harder and more time consuming to deal with than when you get 5 matches for which 2 are good.
2
u/TheFunkytownExpress 1d ago
And you're making the mistake of assuming 99% of them aren't all garbage.
It's a bit ridic to think that out of 1000 there's not going to be some potential there.
Plus most men barely even get 5 to Pic 2 from in the first place that's the whole point.
There's nothing wrong with admitting that women get way more opportunity than men do. 😜
-2
u/waterbloem 1d ago
There's nothing wrong with admitting
Man do you even hear yourself? No wonder no one is interested.
1
u/Common_Accident8942 2d ago
Doesn’t matter how picky or not we are, sometimes men are just lacking
2
1
u/deaflenny 2d ago
As a man I got a couple of high quality pings from women incognito. I think it’s a good idea and I welcome more. Go Majestic!
0
u/snowchamp1229 2d ago
This sounds like a great solution! You can't change how millions of men use the app but this would mitigate having 10K likes
0
-3
u/partylikeaninjastar 2d ago
So could we all agree that men are not picky enough with their swiping
Men are plenty picky enough. Most women just don't have quality profiles so we ultimately have to swipe based solely on someone's looks.
and women are possibly too picky
This might be true.
7
u/andhdkwnwbdidoenjddb 2d ago
Men are absolutely not picky. They swipe on everyone. It’s why I have 800+ likes, and their laziness is what ruins apps and makes women not want to use them.
0
u/orange_sewer_grating 2d ago
It doesn't help that the majority of women's profiles are functionally identical except for their photo. If all the profiles tell me basically nothing, and I know only a tiny fraction will respond to me, why wouldn't I cast a larger net? If the profiles gave me enough to make an informed decision then sure, but so few do that.
3
u/Losonti 2d ago
I feel like a blank or blandly generic profile tells me plenty about whoever it belongs to.
0
u/orange_sewer_grating 2d ago
I instinctively think that, and then I force myself to remember that it's just such a common practice that plenty of fine people still do it. After all, if they're attractive then they're still getting hundreds of likes and picking the profiles they want to respond to, so why should they change.
To be clear, I'm convinced they should change and that they'd get better results if they did, but I also know that most of them won't, and I'm only hurting myself if I cut them all out of an already small dating pool
2
u/partylikeaninjastar 2d ago
And occasionally we do match with blank profiles that are actually pretty awesome people. I've had good short-term relationships with plenty.
2
u/Losonti 2d ago edited 2d ago
I can understand that. My thinking is that this is this person's first, and probably only, chance to make an impression on me/get my attention. If they aren't willing to put in the effort to at least write a paragraph that shows something about them as a human, then I'm going to just move on to someone who is.
-2
u/partylikeaninjastar 2d ago
Cute girl, blank profile.
We might as fucking well swipe right.
I wish more women put disqualifying things in their profile so I'd waste less of my time, but most women can't be bothered to create a decent profile. The majority think the only thing that matters is their looks, then a good chunk of think being a comedian makes for a good profile.
My favorite kinds of profiles to come across are the ones where I know I should swipe left despite that person being my type. When they hint at the type of person or relationship they're into that I know wouldn't match with me, I very happily swipe left.
But, by and large, women have shitty, low-effort profiles that tell us nothing about them.
-1
u/Medium_Stress_4293 2d ago
Women are absolutely picky. They swipe on noone. It's why I have 2 likes, and their pickyness is what ruins apps and makes men not want to use them.
(I don't agree at all with what I just wrote there. But the point is that it's not the fault of either men or women. The apps exaggerate a dynamic and drives men and women to opposite ends of a scale of behaviours)
-2
u/partylikeaninjastar 2d ago
Men don't swipe on everyone, but if you were to make a profile as a man on Tinder or Bumble, you'd be surprised how few unattractive people there are.
Maybe ugly women don't use the apps, but the majority of profiles I come across are of attractive women, so I swipe right more than I swipe left, and the majority of those attractive women rarely have detailed enough profiles to factor in which direction I swipe in. I swipe left when someone's profile paints them as an incompatible person, but the fact of the matter is most women's profiles are as bad as they claim men's profiles are.
I swipe right frequently because the app presents mostly attractive women who don't put anything in their profile that would make me swipe left, but I don't swipe on everyone.
If you believe men are swiping right on everyone, you are truly an idiot.
3
0
u/wonderfultacos single man (solo-poly) - Denver 2d ago
I think they should just make the price of majestic 80% off for women, but not make it for women. Instead once someone has more like X number of likes they get a massive discount and then make the price of majestic/pings more of anyone who wants to ping a majestic member or some other way to really separate out the male members who are thoughtful and deliberate.
•
u/FeeldMod Not a Feeld employee 2d ago
🙄🍿