The comment is part of the data analysis so I didn't crop it

You know the algorithm shows you to fewer people if you swipe right on everyone

Yeah for these algorithms you want to show better signals. Choose a sex/age range your not interested in and just swipe left while watching a movie.
Your algorithmic pickiness will improve tremendously.
But they swipe left on a whole... 3.5% of people! Super picky, that's probably why
- The thing is, you have no idea how many people saw it. If 50 people saw it and he got 14 matches, that's actually pretty good! Imagine if he'd been seen by 500 people instead.

Have you tried being born wealthy? :-D

I'll try that next respawn
- What's the code to unlock it?

2 new friends in 4 years? That's pretty great.

What a beautiful perspective. I was thirdhand crushed by this data before you said that :)

Seriously, how do you even get the data to make such graphs?

On another note, I don't have much sympathy for people who clearly "swipe right on everyone". I am aware that it's a numbers game, but have some standards, man.

Bro he got 14 matches in four years, how can he afford to have standards. If he has any more standards, he will get ZERO matches
Also you can request this data from tinder and bumble support
- You won't get any matches if you don't tell the algorithm what kind of person you're interested in. It won't be able to put you with people you're compatible with.
You are talking to a person with a 0,295623% chance of getting a match...
- That's a bit high standards for me.
use a simple counter for your left and right swipes, then you just need to count the matches and which ones fizzle out

The main problem here: commercial dating apps are not intended to help people find partners or flings. They are intended to make the companies money. Some may initially be functional but enshitification hits them fast, once they have a userbase established.

I believe the algorithms on those apps purposefully hold back the best matches for you unless you pay for a subscription.
- Honestly. I suspect they hold back the best matches even if you do pay for a subscription, so you continue to do so.
I met my boyfriend on OkCupid. That was 5 years ago and I doubt we'd be able to find each other today. The app went from matches based on answering questions to a "hot or not" sleazy hookup tinder clone.
It makes even less sense when you learn that they were never in competition with tinder since the two of them are owned by the same parent company along with nearly even other dating app. You'd think that company would want all its services to be unique in some way so as to encourage diversity in the market but I guess I've not got a mind for business.
- Wow that's crazy. I still remember some of the questions that supposedly made me and my partner 99% compatible. That's such a drastic shift for them.
  Edit for unrelated story: My second highest match was like 97%, but she clarified in her profile that she was looking for a bi third to join her and her partner. OKC kept recommending her so eventually I just messaged her to say "I'm not what you're looking for but good luck!"
- Unrelated, good screenname :)
They're basically all owned by the same company, unless it's small and niche.

~~28:1 odds~~ I don't use tinder so I had to look up that I got that backwards, but rejecting 1 in 28 screams of desperation.

It also makes the app show your own profile to fewer people.

One in a thousand to even get a chance to talk to someone, what an encouraging system

The algorithm suppresses male accounts wih excessively high right swipe ratios
- Yeah, not to defend the apps or anything but filtering out the people who put in no effort and approve 96%+ makes sense.
- I think tinder uses Glicko-2 based on swipes to create an attractiveness ranking.
  We let the (frequently maidenless) chess nerds take control of love.
- They should probably limit how many swipes you get instead of having your swipes go into the void.

there is no way in all of hell that 14k right swipes led to 14 matches unless the person’s bio literally says they are a sex offender or something insane like that

Nah, I can actually believe that. If you’re a below average guy (be it because of your looks or weight), your chances of getting matches on tinder are very slim. I‘m not an ugly guy and I barely had any matches, back when I was on tinder
- Yeah it's the pinnacle of "looks matter the most".
I've been on dating sites for over 10 years now. The most "likes" I've ever had was 17.
Not even matching. That number is like 6 over 10 years...
I'm quite literally an absolute joke of a human though. I'm the exact person people joke about as being the worst kind of person: I'm a (guy) homebody who likes to smoke, play videogames, and garden. I'm fit but not muscular, short, balding, and not a fan of dogs or travel (way too expensive). I'm literally worse than Hitler to almost all women.
Unfortunately the only people who have ever swiped on me except for those 6 I mentioned look like honey booboos mom, have kids, and dogs.
- nah bro you’ll find your soulmate ❤️ you just gotta find the style that works for you to compliment the stuff you can’t change. anyone can be a 7/10, the rest is luck. and this is not even taking into account the fact that a fuckload of people value your personality much higher than cosmetic stuff

Who would want to date someone that uses Sankey diagrams?

Me

If you swype right on everyone, you're shadowbanned very quickly and simply don't appear for others anymore.

Consider the OneLobster009: you don't have sex, because you're a weirdo. RIP in pepperonis.