• @dai
    link
    3
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    No, only tinder premium can do so IIRC.

    Bumble? From memory women can only message first, men must wait to be messaged before they can.

    It’s been a while since I used those platforms so my information could be incorrect.

      • I Cast Fist
        link
        fedilink
        31 hour ago

        As a man who would often get matches but rarely get so much as a “hi” to allow the conversation to start (i’d say only 1/8 of the matches would say anything in the 24h), I really wonder why. A number of women apparently never read that they were supposed to send a message first when using bumble (I did hear that more than once on the app), but others? Why?

        • Buglefingers
          link
          21 hour ago

          Well, although I’m not so sure about bumble, I know women on tinder have a volume problem, a few friends have shown me the number of matches and current conversations and wow, it’s actually absurd. I could not maintain that many interactions either. So perhaps if not an issue with formulating an opener there’s just too many matches to reasonably get through them?

          That makes me actually wonder if a match limit would be a worthwhile feature on some of these. Just a stray shower thought

          • I Cast Fist
            link
            fedilink
            147 minutes ago

            Tinder is a wholly different problem because of that. If memory serves, it’s roughly 80/20 distribution of male/female profiles, so women are absolutely bombarded with conversations, as pretty much every man will want to try and get attention without knowing how deep his last message is buried among all others.

            Bumble had less people in my area last I used it (late 2023), but I can imagine that men vastly outnumbered women even there, but again, since they had to start a conversation first, I suspect it’d be slightly more manageable than tinder. The idea of limiting matches sounds useful and perhaps good for the end user, ie: you won’t show up on searches and you can’t swipe as long as you have 10 or more matches, you have to actually unmatch to “get back”. Don’t expect any app to ever implement anything similar without figuring a way to make it a very shitty experience.

            • Buglefingers
              link
              126 minutes ago

              I can see how it’d be less money for the app and better for the User, so definitely not gonna happen lmao. IIRC choice fatigue grows wildly with anything beyond a few options so, yeah, being bombarded like that suuuuucks.

      • Flax
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 hours ago

        Wasn’t that the whole point of bumble?

        • Buglefingers
          link
          12 hours ago

          Yeah, pretty much haha, otherwise its just tinder. I used it briefly a while back and usually the first message would be “.” so that I could start the actual conversation. So I supposed it’s never been all that different to begin with

      • Cethin
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 hours ago

        Yeah, the old Bumble model was better (in my opinion as a man). It creates incentive to have an interesting profile with stuff people can comment on. The newer “opening move” thing incentivizes generic responses. Bumble (in my experience) still has women message first far more often than Tinder though. You may just have to wait and not message immediately.

        Creating an opening message is only really difficult if someone has a generic boring profile, so if it’s an issue for anyone maybe that’s why.

        • Buglefingers
          link
          21 hour ago

          I agree it was a better model. I’ve never found it easy to begin a conversation even with someone who has a good profile. I just struggle with the formulation of an opener. Way easier in person IMO, though a good profile makes a conversation continuation much easier.