Just when you thought it was safe - OK CUPID PART 3: The Return of the WOO!

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

There's a whole heap of new shit on OKC. Fuck it!

― dog latin (dog latin), Thursday, 22 July 2004 08:05 (6 years ago) Permalink

Why do I have to be at work when there's a super cool "spot the virgin" game on there. fuck this.

― dog latin (dog latin), Thursday, 22 July 2004 08:22 (6 years ago) Permalink

Oh!! I'm on there now! starryvs is my user name! I've read none of the threads about this so GO GO GO, who are you all on there? Lets COMPARE!

― Sarah (starry), Thursday, 22 July 2004 08:22 (6 years ago) Permalink

So far I have been wooed by a punk fan at Goldsmiths and someone who wants to know where he can play online Scrabble.

Marvellous!

― Sarah (starry), Thursday, 22 July 2004 08:25 (6 years ago) Permalink

Starry I am crueller than you but you are more into drugs. Which sounds about right.

― Liz :x (Liz :x), Thursday, 22 July 2004 08:54 (6 years ago) Permalink

Liz how do I find YOU on it?! I don't know how this works!!

― Sarah (starry), Thursday, 22 July 2004 08:58 (6 years ago) Permalink

I am wintryme. There used to be a box down at the bottom of the page where you could search for people. I used the Compare Two Users thing.

― Liz :x (Liz :x), Thursday, 22 July 2004 08:59 (6 years ago) Permalink

Yes but what does "radcliffy" mean?

― Sarah (starry), Thursday, 22 July 2004 09:07 (6 years ago) Permalink

radcliffy = oxbridge

― dog latin (dog latin), Thursday, 22 July 2004 09:08 (6 years ago) Permalink

I couldn't track down a definitive list of people, but I am akendoha.

― dog latin (dog latin), Thursday, 22 July 2004 09:08 (6 years ago) Permalink

Dunno. There's a glossary somewhere. Anyway, I'm more whatever it is than you.

xpost REALLY dl? Haha that's actually true as well.

― Liz :x (Liz :x), Thursday, 22 July 2004 09:08 (6 years ago) Permalink

liz - i think that's what it's supposed to mean anyway.

― dog latin (dog latin), Thursday, 22 July 2004 09:12 (6 years ago) Permalink

Dude. Btw I am crap at the virgin game, although I'm better at spotting virginal boys than girls.

― Liz :x (Liz :x), Thursday, 22 July 2004 09:14 (6 years ago) Permalink

bah! work stops me doing the virgin game.

― dog latin (dog latin), Thursday, 22 July 2004 09:14 (6 years ago) Permalink

I can't believe those bastards send you a mail about the new site changes. I THOUGHT IT WAS A WOO.

― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 22 July 2004 10:10 (6 years ago) Permalink

At least they haven't ruined it a la allmusic

― hmmm (hmmm), Thursday, 22 July 2004 10:25 (6 years ago) Permalink

I really like the way that the "real life friends" button says "BECKON THEM"!!!

― Sarah (starry), Thursday, 22 July 2004 10:41 (6 years ago) Permalink

It won't let me add mine at the moment, so it says, rather hurtfully, that I have 'no real friends'.

― Liz :x (Liz :x), Thursday, 22 July 2004 10:48 (6 years ago) Permalink

My best score on the virgin test is 65%. I suck.

― dog latin (dog latin), Thursday, 22 July 2004 12:15 (6 years ago) Permalink

Wow. I got about 54%. It's not a skill that I am particularlt displeased not to have though. I rarely go hunting for virgins.

― hmmm (hmmm), Thursday, 22 July 2004 12:17 (6 years ago) Permalink

I'm loving the Compare tool today. I am kinkier yet less indie than Carsmile.

Hey! I'm getting better at spotting virgins! 66%.

― Liz :x (Liz :x), Thursday, 22 July 2004 12:37 (6 years ago) Permalink

I am roxymuzak, obv.

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:21 (6 years ago) Permalink

Friends networks! Virgin games! IT'S FULL OF STARS!

― Gregory Henry (Gregory Henry), Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:36 (6 years ago) Permalink

you'd think you'd get better at the virgin game but you don't.

― dog latin (dog latin), Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:37 (6 years ago) Permalink

So true.

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:39 (6 years ago) Permalink

I did poorly on the virgin game, even though I thought all of the following would hold true:

girls with teeny-emo webcam shots = 14-year-old virgins
dorky girls with dorm-room pictures = college-freshman virgins
young boys trying hard to look "nice" = virgins
people with photos in apartments or bars = not virgins

My world is all topsy-turvy now.

― nabiscothingy, Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:40 (6 years ago) Permalink

How did I get 50% on a 21-question test?

― Gregory Henry (Gregory Henry), Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:47 (6 years ago) Permalink

One of them had had a blowjob.

― Alba (Alba), Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:51 (6 years ago) Permalink

magic.

― dog latin (dog latin), Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:51 (6 years ago) Permalink

how the fuck did it come up with the statistics at the end? how did it know who'd had sex within an hour of the test? Actually I don't ever remember it asking me if i was a virgin in the first place.

― dog latin (dog latin), Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:53 (6 years ago) Permalink

There's a "how many people have you, well, you know?" on the Type Test though, no?

― Gregory Henry (Gregory Henry), Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:53 (6 years ago) Permalink

oh. okay.

― dog latin (dog latin), Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:54 (6 years ago) Permalink

Isn't this frivolous application of collected responses against some kind of data protection act? Have these people agreed to have their profiles turned into a spot-the-virgin game?

― Alba (Alba), Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:56 (6 years ago) Permalink

You can opt out in your settings.

― nabiscothingy, Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:57 (6 years ago) Permalink

yes. it says it in the FAQ and sort of in a roundabout way on the front page. you can request it to be taken off if you so wish too.

― dog latin (dog latin), Thursday, 22 July 2004 14:58 (6 years ago) Permalink

Oh, fucking hell. I just did the whole thing and then got an error page at the end so I don't know what my score is.

― Alba (Alba), Thursday, 22 July 2004 15:13 (6 years ago) Permalink

Bah. So did I.

― marvin wang (marvin wang), Thursday, 22 July 2004 15:31 (6 years ago) Permalink

The relevant page, post email provision (http://www.okcupid.com/signup) is down. Maybe if they fix it I can refresh the page later.

― Alba (Alba), Thursday, 22 July 2004 15:34 (6 years ago) Permalink

Still don't know what I got the first time, but I did it again and only got 38% correct, which is appalling. So I did it again, trying to go more for the obvious choice this time, and got 71%.

It says: "In general, males are about as good as females at spotting virgins. But females almost always guess correctly with female pairs."

Unless my logic is skewy, surely this also implies that men alomst always guess correctly with male pairs, unless they instead make up all the ground by getting much better scores in the mixed pair ones, which would be very odd.

― Alba (Alba), Saturday, 24 July 2004 15:51 (6 years ago) Permalink

(I think I fucked up the first time by assuming that dumpy, unattractive teenage girls were actually quite promiscuous, as a means of making themselves feel better about themselves, or as a product of sexual abuse. I now feel ashamed of this strategy.)

― Alba (Alba), Saturday, 24 July 2004 15:54 (6 years ago) Permalink

Alba, your logic is wrong - all that tells us is that women must be rather less good at anything but female pairs, and it certainly doesn't imply what you infer.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Saturday, 24 July 2004 19:12 (6 years ago) Permalink

But how do the two sexes end up being about as good as each other overall? There are only three sections to the test - m/m, f/f and f/m. They must be losing ground to the men on one of the sections other than f/f. If it's f/m, then as I said, that's weird. If it's m/m then then male contestants must be, as I said, as good at that as the female ones are at f/f.

― Alba (Alba), Saturday, 24 July 2004 20:09 (6 years ago) Permalink

(I'm struggling to articulate why I can't countenance the possibilty that they would be better at f/m and the same as men at m/m. I guess that's where I'm stepping out of strict reason)

― Alba (Alba), Saturday, 24 July 2004 20:14 (6 years ago) Permalink

Hang on, now I'm confused.

― Alba (Alba), Saturday, 24 July 2004 20:15 (6 years ago) Permalink

you're not alone.

― cºzen (Cozen), Saturday, 24 July 2004 20:16 (6 years ago) Permalink

Oh. I confused myself by making a typo - in the post three above I mean "I can't countenance the possibility that they would be worse at f/m and the same as men at m/m."

― Alba (Alba), Saturday, 24 July 2004 20:17 (6 years ago) Permalink

I've played around with some examples of possible averages and see my logic was indeed skewy. For a 70% overall score, it could be:

Women

f/f = 90
m/f = 75
m/m= 45

Men =

f/f = 68%
m/f = 75%
m/m = 67%

Which would be mean men are better at spotting m/f than either m/m or f/f. Hmm.. that would also be weird. Other combinations I've tried result in both sexes being bettter at spotting female virgins than male ones, which seem noteworthy enough for them to put up on the website.

Can you come up with a set of average scores that fits what we know without any interesting implications at all?

― Alba (Alba), Saturday, 24 July 2004 20:38 (6 years ago) Permalink

I always spoil everything.

― Alba (Alba), Saturday, 24 July 2004 21:21 (6 years ago) Permalink

I can't stop looking at her:

ihttp://www.okcupid.com/profile?pic=0&tuid=8878330946154156249

― cºzen (Cozen), Saturday, 24 July 2004 22:59 (6 years ago) Permalink

Ew. I can.

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Saturday, 24 July 2004 23:07 (6 years ago) Permalink

Skipping 1829 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

how is your band coming along?

― sarahel, Monday, 30 August 2010 21:36 (4 days ago) Permalink

FAO London ppl, JOIN MY BAND!

― acoleuthic, Monday, 30 August 2010 21:36 (4 days ago) Permalink

One of those weird cases where the gender neutral singular "they" makes no sense at all. Unless L-Jagz is advertising for couples now.

― Karen D. Tregaskin, Monday, 30 August 2010 22:19 (4 days ago) Permalink

Not wanting to derail at all, but I can't honestly see how in context that 'they' is confusing. It makes perfect sense to me.

― emil.y, Monday, 30 August 2010 22:20 (4 days ago) Permalink

ha...so for the last few days i've been chatting to a girl on here and we're going for a drink next week. she's really fun and good to talk to and she is also incredibly beautiful, like kind of jaw dropping, i mean mega stunning.

without wanting to sound utterly devoid of self esteem (i have...some!) I keep wishing I wasn't away all weekend so we could meet sooner and hence there'd be less time for me to fuck this up! my main prob is we're exchanging messages a lot and i don't want to have it all burnt out by 7 days time...should I just hold off now we've agreed to meet..slowly tone down the messages a bit? or is that bad?

ah neuroses...

― I see what this is (Local Garda), Tuesday, 31 August 2010 20:14 (3 days ago) Permalink

Ronan you're an incredibly witty guy - it's hard to imagine sending messages would be anything other than a very strong suit for you! I'd keep at it - if you drop it off you're risking being judged by a fresh first impression rather than a v.favourable one?

― Gravel Puzzleworth, Tuesday, 31 August 2010 20:41 (3 days ago) Permalink

thanks a lot! yep prob better to keep talking, I guess just surprised to meet someone I really like on this site.

― I see what this is (Local Garda), Tuesday, 31 August 2010 20:50 (3 days ago) Permalink

I am in a remarkably similar position - the someone v promising is morelike vvvv promising - also I cannot think about them (lol) until 1pm so ban me or w/e

godspeed ronan - imho keep the flame burning, just talk about amusing inane stuff if need be

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 03:32 (2 days ago) Permalink

me and this girl sent each other gifs until the flame burnt out

oh how it burned

― ITS YA BOY (zorn_bond.mp3), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 03:42 (2 days ago) Permalink

giforrhea?

― sarahel, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 03:43 (2 days ago) Permalink

― ITS YA BOY (zorn_bond.mp3), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 05:36 (2 days ago) Permalink

high warning: i could become unbearably squee over the next coupla weeks depending on her very next email/our planned cityscape poetry ramble

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 14:40 (2 days ago) Permalink

her? i mean THEIR. dammit.

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 14:40 (2 days ago) Permalink

it would be funny if it was the same girl

― I see what this is (Local Garda), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 14:56 (2 days ago) Permalink

don't terrify me

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 14:58 (2 days ago) Permalink

i know...lets not discuss this any further!

― I see what this is (Local Garda), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:00 (2 days ago) Permalink

although if i'm anything to go by, if there's someone i click with online, anybody else i'm talking to is kinda...deprioritised, shall we say - i'd imagine most people are the same, so if yr having rly upbeat regular chatz with someone it's reasonable to assume you are the one they are concentrating on too

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:02 (2 days ago) Permalink

DEFINITELY.

― I see what this is (Local Garda), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:02 (2 days ago) Permalink

i don't get the "their" comment

― sarahel, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:03 (2 days ago) Permalink

emil.y and kate mithering upthread

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:04 (2 days ago) Permalink

you don't know if it's a girl or not?

― sarahel, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:05 (2 days ago) Permalink

but yeah exciting times for ilx's london bachelor brigade - autumn is truly the classy season for romancing imho

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:05 (2 days ago) Permalink

gf has moved down to college for a year, considering this tbh

― k¸ (darraghmac), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:06 (2 days ago) Permalink

KIDDING, sheesh

― k¸ (darraghmac), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:07 (2 days ago) Permalink

you dog

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:07 (2 days ago) Permalink

he just wants an excuse to objectify women imo

― sarahel, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:08 (2 days ago) Permalink

gonna be doing a lot of objectifying women yh

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:09 (2 days ago) Permalink

by that i mean we the strapping menfolk of ilx

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:09 (2 days ago) Permalink

i thought you wanted the woman to use the strap-on, L?

― sarahel, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:11 (2 days ago) Permalink

Stop this, right now.

― Andrew (enneff), Friday, 25 August 2006 12:46 (4 years ago)

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:13 (2 days ago) Permalink

sorry - i got confused about whether i was posting in this thread or the pubic interest one

― sarahel, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:14 (2 days ago) Permalink

squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ok you guys. EVEN GIVING ME EMPLOYMENT TIPS

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:40 (2 days ago) Permalink

dude i gave you employment tips!

― sarahel, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:42 (2 days ago) Permalink

objectify u-35 men as possible recruits for five a side a lot quicker and more ruthlessly than i objectify any other category for any other reason tbh

― k¸ (darraghmac), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:48 (2 days ago) Permalink

so like you look at them and say, "have you seen the ass on that one?"

― sarahel, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:49 (2 days ago) Permalink

squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ok you guys. EVEN GIVING ME EMPLOYMENT TIPS

You're becoming a live sex show performer, Louis? With pegging as your specialty?

― Christine Green Leafy Dragon Indigo, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:51 (2 days ago) Permalink

in one

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:51 (2 days ago) Permalink

<3 Christine!!

― sarahel, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:53 (2 days ago) Permalink

so like you look at them and say, "have you seen the ass on that one?"

not a prerequisite for a decent five a side footballer tbh

― k¸ (darraghmac), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 15:55 (2 days ago) Permalink

:-B

― Christine Green Leafy Dragon Indigo, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 16:02 (2 days ago) Permalink

my god - ilx can you bear with me for the next 4 or 5 days as I attempt not to jinx the most so-gonna-happen thing of my life

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 16:14 (2 days ago) Permalink

That depends. Can you shut up about it for the next 4-5 days in an even better attempt not to overthink/overdiscuss it which will effectively be jinxing yourSELF?

― Jesus doesn't want me for a thundercloud (Laurel), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 16:16 (2 days ago) Permalink

that is sage advice, not a word more

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 16:16 (2 days ago) Permalink

so gwan who is she?

― k¸ (darraghmac), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 16:17 (2 days ago) Permalink

― acoleuthic, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 16:20 (2 days ago) Permalink

storming her castle on yr white steed

― k¸ (darraghmac), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 16:23 (2 days ago) Permalink

I wish you good luck with her.

― Christine Green Leafy Dragon Indigo, Wednesday, 1 September 2010 16:25 (2 days ago) Permalink

oh god i have to go on a date today

― momus comes out of the sky and he stands there (del), Wednesday, 1 September 2010 16:29 (2 days ago) Permalink

protip -- try escalating to aim after a few messages if yr feelin it. its more casual and no more anxiety over writing/waitingfor replies

― trivial fursuit (diamonddave85), Friday, 3 September 2010 00:45 (1 hour ago) Permalink

or just meet them IRL

christ I can't sleep I'm so excited

― acoleuthic, Friday, 3 September 2010 00:50 (1 hour ago) Permalink

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.