Comments on Brand Catharsis: Shouldn't We All Be on Match.com?

Sandra, maybe wait to comment until you've rea...

2010-07-08T12:34:55.784-04:00

Sandra, maybe wait to comment until you've read the post.

In other news, http://ilovecharts.tumblr.com/post/785694349

You're not done writing your essay until you&#...

2009-11-27T16:58:47.529-05:00

You're not done writing your essay until you've polished your language by correcting the grammar, making sentences flow essay writing service, incorporating rhythm, emphasis, adjusting the formality, giving it a level-headed tone, and making other intuitive edits. Proofread until it reads just how you want it to sound.

I'd say you've beat the WSJ to the punch. Topical ...

2009-04-03T14:07:00.000-04:00

I'd say you've beat the WSJ to the punch. Topical article here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123819495915561237.html?mod=djem_jiewr_swwgn_040209

Another great post, Matt. I think your general poi...

2009-03-12T23:04:00.000-04:00

Another great post, Matt. I think your general point is well taken, but Paxton and Anonymous raise valid points that go to your implicit assumption that our online life should mirror in key functional respects our actual life. Like Paxton and Anonymous, I am willing to question this assumption. Web 2.0 is addictive. This doesn't mean it is bad. Rather, like all broad innovations that successfully address a surprising number of our desires, they envelop us rather quickly-- often too quickly to maintain consideration of primary questions (i.e., should we be getting into the business of creating a multifaceted web presence for ourselves in the first place?). I think it's worth stepping back and asking what kind of life we could have if we could share every little thought and link and funny or intriguing notion that crossed our brains (Twitter). With a hint of self control, probably a pretty good one, as we could connect those little random thoughts to our friends miles away and share a bit of emotion. On the other hand (match.com), what sort of life would we have without the occasional brutal/disastrous relationship to help us appreciate the ones we worked at and were successes in the end? Maybe not as good there.
My point is, the Internets can make a lot of the things we want to do easier. I'm not sure about the actual development, from scratch, of meaningful relationships of any kind (including facebook here).
That you're grappling with this topic (and doing so eloquently) supports the fact that there is no magic bullet (despite what Congress and the President tell you) for figuring out human stuff. All praise is due to the one true God. Everything else we've gotta figure out.
Good job.

@anon

Great point about having to pay for ...

2009-03-12T18:05:00.000-04:00

@anon

Great point about having to pay for Match! I didn't even think about that. I created a free profile to browse, so I'm not sure how much the service actually costs. I guess the kind of service I'm talking about would be a free facebook-type format with a match.com type atmosphere (i.e.; regulated profiles). Not sure if it's even possible, but I'd sign up!

The difference between facebook and match/eHarmony...

2009-03-12T16:57:00.000-04:00

The difference between facebook and match/eHarmony/YahooPersonals is the money involved. Dating sites aren't cheap (and they shouldn't be, just take a perusal of the free personals on Craigslist for why). Everyone can't be on match because it's cost-prohibitive. Match carries a stigma because only those "desperate" enough to pay money for a dating site are on it. It's a cycle.

That being said, there shouldn't be a stigma at all. The money spent on match is much better spent than wasting $30 at some bar to buy a drinks for girls that turn out to have a husband and 3 kids.

It's true. Nobody can really vouch for the quality...

2009-03-12T16:47:00.000-04:00

It's true. Nobody can really vouch for the quality of interactions on social networks like facebook. But I guess that's problem. Facebook isn't an appropriate medium for flirting and courting, but people use it anyway...tons of people.

Facebook, like dating, is a social 'constant,' whether we like it or not. And it's becoming yet another tool to socialize (not necessarily a better one). I guess my suggestion is for setting up an appropriate medium for those who do find value in social networks.

Sure, we don't have to use online communities for anything...but we do. By creating a well-defined dating/relationship/love network, people who are looking for relationships can explore without having to yell through wall posts and status messages. But of course, you have to appreciate online communities in the first place for it to work.

Thanks for the comment, as always Pax!

What I find so interesting about this is that whil...

2009-03-12T16:20:00.000-04:00

What I find so interesting about this is that while you champion the internet as a means of meeting people, you never mention actually meeting and interacting in person. Everything is done from the safety and anonymity of the internet. Additionally, matching people by personality takes the fun out of average, ok, brutal and awful relationships that help us find what we really are looking for in someone. Just because social networking sites are popular, doesn’t make them good. Just because social networking sites are available doesn’t mean we should use them.