A little deductive reasoning can spare you an agonizing date.
If you’ve had a series of confusing (or even disturbing) online dates, then you probably overlooked some key clues in your companion’s profile. Take a look at this list and see if any of these red flags ring a bell.
*They only have one photo on their profile
What it says: Since most people can manage to scrape together at least 3 acceptable photos of themselves, just having one immediately sets off a red flag. Either the subject isn’t terribly trusting or invested in the process or could only manage to find one old-ish photo where they look attractive. If the person were subjectively good looking, they’d be able to find at least a couple pics that showcase their various angles.
*They only have photos of themselves taken by a phone or laptop
What it says: Most folks have an array of pictures taken from social events and gatherings. If someone doesn’t have even one of those on their profile, it’s probably because they lead a fairly insulated life with limited socialization.
*They post multiple attractive photos, but barely fill out their profile
What that says: They think the rules don’t apply to them. Online dating has a standard list of unspoken guidelines by which most people abide. People who think they can get away with skipping the basics strictly because they’re objectively attractive display an alarming sense of entitlement.
*They have multiple photos, but none with a clear shot of their face.
What it says: These people expect you to be so intrigued that you’ll feel compelled to respond. That indicates a sense of entitlement. That will only lead to further issues down the road. Or they’re hiding from someone.
*They verbalize deal-breakers
What it says: It’s perfectly acceptable to have preferences. Everybody does. Selecting “non-smoker” as a smoking preference is enough to tell me that you prefer not to date a smoker. Overtly stating that non-smokers/right wingers/blondes/Christians need not apply makes you sound intolerant. If you’re intolerant about one thing, you’re probably intolerant about others. Being opinionated if fine. Being intolerant suggests a rigidity and intensity that might be too much to handle.
*They reveal that they’re just out of a relationship
What it says: Someone who alerts you to the fact that they’re just out of a relationship is typically just looking for a quick hook up or trying to get back on the dating horse. Unless you want to be someone’s “get over the hump” hump, avoid them. “Just out of a relationship” is usually code for “Just looking for casual sex.” These people will expect you to be inordinately forgiving and understanding of their plight.
*The reveal sensitive details about their past
What it says: Sharing with the internet that your father abandoned you or that you were once tortured by an in home burglary sends the message that you carry heavy baggage and emotional scars. Most people know that that is a turn off. That’s why someone who would share such intimate information either lacks self-awareness or consistently seeks attention/praise/sympathy. Unless you have a thing for high maintenance mates, avoid.
*Their profile is excessively verbose
What it says: This person possesses a dazzling level of self-absorption if they expect people to muddle through their personal manifesto. Don’t make the mistake of assuming that more words means more emotional depth. The only thing they’re invested in is themselves.
*They take longer than a few hours to reply to an email
What it says: Unless they are trapped in a Panic Room without a signal, there is no excuse for taking longer than a few hours to reply to a message. People are attached to their smartphones, tablets, iPads and laptops. A long lapse in communication – without offering any explanation – conveys a low level of interest or schedule so filled (possibly by a mate) that they don’t have time to properly get to know someone.
*They’re vague about their availability
What it says: The whole point of dating online is to get offline. If someone drags their feet about setting up an initial meeting, there’s a reason and it’s rarely a good one. Cut your losses pronto or risk being strung along with innocuous texts every couple of days.
*They inform readers that they don’t typically initiate contact or check their inbox regularly
What it says: They’re risk averse. They expect you to make the first move so that they don’t have to chance being rejected. Try to imagine dating someone who needs you to continuously prove yourself. Exhausting, yes?
While many of these seem elementary, understanding why people do these things will help you avoid the bad daters online and off.
Here’s one final bit of advice. When you come across something in a profile or in offline interaction that feels off to you, stop and ask yourself ONE question:
Why would someone do that?
If you can’t come up with a reasonable explanation that doesn’t involve rationalizing, then that means you should probably move on. We’ve discussed critical thinking quite a bit here. Critical thinking is where you challenge commonly believed assumptions. Deductive reasoning takes that a step further. It involves cultivating enough knowledge, understanding and experience about your environment/subject to be able effectively analyze a given situation. The longer you do online dating and the more experience you gather, the quicker you will be able to spot red flags or potential problems.
Two more to add:
They state in their online profile how ‘busy’ they are. When I see this, I instantly think, “They’ve already set themselves up for excuses on why they a) don’t respond to your email, b) don’t initiate contact, and c) won’t meet you ‘offline’.
They make it sound like a gun was put to their head and they were forced to create an online profile:
“My friend told me I should do this.” “I don’t know how I feel about this online dating thing” “I can’t believe I’m doing this”, etc. To me, this sounds like they think they’re ‘above’ online dating, like they’re better than this. Guess what? It’s 2013. You’re not. Build a bridge and get over it. It also makes them sound apprehensive, like, “I really don’t want to do this, but I guess I have to.” That’s not the person I want to try to ‘convince’ to correspond with me online to hopefully meet offline. You either want to meet someone, or you don’t.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
29 
0
I take your point but I think this is something to be a bit understanding about.
We’re used to putting ourselves out there and getting rejected and we know that is what its about.
Its a bit different if you were raised on a load of myths about your own passivity that seemed, probably, to be true for a large part of your life hitherto. Interested men, maybe not the princes promised but still, did just turn up and ask.
Joining a dating site is itself a bit of a hit to the self esteem, those ‘gun to the head’ comments while I agree irritating with repetition are just people negotiating with themselves. You won’t find a single woman on the entire internet who is the sort of person who dates online. Apart from all of them obviously. It isn’t their fault we have the culture we do.
Like or Dislike:
3 
3
I agree with all of these except taking longer than a few hours to reply. Most women typically take about a day to respond, and it is not uncommon for someone to take a few days especially with holidays, vacations, etc, at the end of the year. I will typically mirror how long they take to reply, but not more than a day or two. Also, not everyone (me included) is married to their cell phone. I don’t keep it on all the time so I’m not constantly recharging it. I think using this as a criteria will end up in loss of a lot of potential matches.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
32 
0
Yes, people are amazingly slovenly about their communications. And this is true of business too. You want a big deal wrapped up by Fri, but you’re just getting to the critical details sent by email on Thurs afternoon, after 5PM, or even Friday morning, after 9AM? Yep, done all the damn time. By some of the largest corporations in the world too, BTW. They expect you to accommodate them. As does everyone else, it’s a very common everyday delusion. So count on it, Ms. ‘Thang’ is 2 days out from responding to you in a lackadaisical manner. Mr. Suave is about the same with his patented disinterested stance. Yet some people are busy. Some people actually do have lives where they lead offices and other people depend on them for advice and constant direction. This is no excuse for ignoring the simple ‘Dinner @ 7 on Fri?’ question. But for the usual ‘fishing’ ‘How’s with you/u?’ text, the best many might do is tell you truthfully ‘busy’.
So irrational expectations might also be added to the ‘resolutions’ list too. Not just with ‘communications’ but with life in general. Don’t expect sterling outcomes with suboptimal parts or components. Anywhere.
If you’re starting with imagining that dull but yummy looking boy will be as interesting as he looks? You’ll often be disappointed to know that he works in his father’s hardware store/shipping Co, (‘Yes, they still have them’) after flunking out of Rutgers while being drunk too often & chasing too many of the girls. Which BTW, is Hard to do, and takes constant effort! There also will be no similar ‘hidden talents’ or ‘reserves of intelligence’ to be found in that yes, decent looking but overly entitled air-headed blond/brunette from Schenectady you met last week. That well dressed accountant with decent manners and a lovely way of putting things is still a bit overweight, and has some debts left over from his failed ‘starter’ marriage. That smashing looking laid back lovely you met at that diner actually does work there and has several kids by an absentee dad in KS. She’s still a smart diligent hard worker, but never finished her degree, and absolutely does not want any more kids. So she’s a bit older than you might suspect, but still looking for a ‘respectful BF’. Whatever that means. To her, a bankster’s gf or even mistress in a pinch. To you, a decent steady blue collar guy would fill the bill nicely, but she remains to be convinced. ‘I see them everyday, they’re as common as dirt & I deserve better now’. Perhaps that’s true too. But it’s delusional just the same. Cheers, ‘VJ’
Hot debate. What do you think?
8 
7
“Most folks have an array of pictures taken from social events and gatherings”
Hrm, put it this way, I think that is a lot truer for young women (most likely) that is for older men with decent jobs they’d like to keep (least likely). I suspect you’ll find that most of the people with laptop and phone shots follow that distribution of likelihood. Men in their late 30s and 40s with that kind of ‘array’ are a certain type you may or may not actually want.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
11 
0
Just another perspective on the photos taken from social events and gatherings: I purposefully don’t use these because I am uncomfortable with having friends’ and family members’ photos posted on an online dating site (especially a free one, like OKC). I know if I were off the market, I wouldn’t want my photo to be on OKC or Match or otherwise on the internet on someone else’s dating profile. I could crop people out or otherwise “edit out” their faces using photo-editing apps, but to me, those edited photos on other people’s profiles inevitably end up looking creepy. So I don’t necessarily think that excluding photos with other people means that you live an isolated, solitary life. It could just mean you’re perhaps more privacy-minded than most. (I’m not on Facebook, Twitter, etc., for the same reason.)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
13 
1
The red flag is not that you’ve cropped people out of your social gathering pictures. It’s when the only pictures are those taken with a webcam or phone cam self portraits that throws up the red flag.
Like or Dislike:
0 
4
Well, anyone over 35 with a decent job and financial security is likely to be flying a ‘red flag’ then. Still, I guess the bar flies and the superannuated ‘struggling musician/actor’ types will be fine.
I’m doing serious business with serious people, I don’t want the first twenty google hits for me to be pictures of me in bars and at parties. Nobody thinks thats cute, they think its pathetic. Its just not the done thing in adult circles, we’re not all teenage girls or Silvio Berlusconi.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
PS. Those are all examples of inductive reasoning, not deductive reasoning.
To be fair about this, Holmes himself notoriously talks the talk about deduction but then in the stories always carries out inductive reasoning so you are in good company.
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
This is a great list. Unfortunately so many profiles of the women on POF fall into one of these categories. Dont know if thats a function of the quality of people on POF or if thats just a function of the online dating population in general. I should give myself a New Years resolution and try out the other sites this year.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
It’s a great list. Thanks to this I can exclude 99% of the people online. Any additions? Maybe we can go for the other 1%! Maybe I can be Sherlock Holmes and can reject any relationship with an inferior and pine for someone like Irene Adler who I’ve never met and may not exist.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2
It was pretty controversial at the time (nudity and S&M!) but the ‘Sherlock’ take on Irene Adler was for me pretty good. A lot of people failed to notice the symmetry throughout, she was naked but so was Sherlock at one point. She was a dominatrix but when Sherlock chucks the guy out of the window it was pure sadism as well. He was asexual to point of being sexual, she was sexual to the point of being asexual again. I think I might be the only person who thought it was profoundly romantic. And perhaps something of a warning to anyone who seriously seeks their soul mate double.
And 1%? Holmes was always more of a fan of the 7% solution as I recall.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
All in all, I think that the pointers given are pretty sound ones. May quibble about one or two, abut for the most part it seems to lead to the underlying notion of common sense.
Having said that, I would have to add that you have to be careful about immediately red flagging potential dates to death. What do I mean by that?
Each of those specific pieces of advice has merit. But are you looking to include someone or exclude them. Sure you want to be careful, but you might find that you might be eliminating prospective dates, or at least an initial coffee style meeting just because of one of those red flags. Kinda like someone who is a cop who is predisposed to see a potential bad guy at every turn. You need to be aware of them, but it is a bad idea to categorically hit the little red button on the ejector seat.
Depending on what/who you are looking for you still out there to meet people. The only way to meet people is to actually meet people. Meet them selectively, to be sure… but still meet them.
Another point that sometimes is lost: just as any one of us has a criteria as we use this Sherlock Holmes method, others will be doing the same to us. What red flags would any one of use raise?
So apply this list in a reasonable fashion. Oh…and have fun out there and hopefully enjoy yourself. Because if you aren’t enjoying something, you might want to re assess your motivations and processes.
Interesting post.
Like or Dislike:
6 
0