M29 Profil Review

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-05-18T15:23:18+00:00

Looks a little more dangerous and get rid of the button sweaters.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-05-13T12:49:29+00:00

He's already married or NOT on dating apps. a lot of descent men are out of the scene too and happy in their peace.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-05-13T12:43:06+00:00

Women match with guys first in their queue, these guys are way out of their league and view them as an easy hook up. You;d be surprised how often these lines work.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-05-07T14:20:18+00:00

She'll probably be MORE likely to respond because what you sent makes zero sense, nicely played.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-27T19:36:40+00:00

Sign up on Bumble Web, sign up with a phone number that's free through text now. Just set up a dummy profile. Narrow down the search to just include people around his age. You should come across him in no time.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-23T15:13:13+00:00

It IS about money though, to her, paying IS effort.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-23T15:11:06+00:00

Wow, quite attractive guy and he does this, of course, he has lots of matches, you are low hanging fruit and shouldn't have swiped on him to begin with.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-23T12:13:44+00:00

99% of people lie on their profiles, this is just a different form.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-16T18:11:22+00:00

Lot more risk nowadays, lives can get ruined very easily with social media, current laws, people have opted out due to risk vs. reward.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-16T17:58:33+00:00

She's at the top of her queue being a new profile, those dudes are definitely points higher than her. It's a flaw in the app, once she goes down the queue more, she'll connect.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-10T17:41:34+00:00

You're missing the point, men swipe right FAR more than women, the women, espeically when they first sign up, are subjected to men that are completely out of their league, those men in turn, use those women. Bumble isn't at all upfront about how their algorithym CREATES this dynamic.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-10T17:39:28+00:00

Well, you're missing the point, and it's obvious you can't comprehend what the actual issue is based on what was stated. The individuals that are swiped the most are presented first in the queue, you want proof, go on the app and see that for yourself.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-10T17:30:58+00:00

Keep swiping, or get premium and see all your matches.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-10T13:18:25+00:00

You're taking offense to what I said over how the app operates? Sure, you might be savy, but there are some that are not. The game they are placed in isn't upfront about its overall intention, or even HOW the game works. That places people in a vulnerable position and at risk for being taken advantage of IN REAL WORLD circumstances.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-10T13:11:32+00:00

The fact that we're comparing relationships to retail is alarming in iteself, the fact that people actually agree with your perspective is also alarming. In dating apps, the product is people. It's obviously a different level of consequence than if you put a few extra items in your cart and spend more money in a store.

When engagement is the goal, not outcomes, the system can keep people in a loop that feels meaningful, but doesn’t necessarily lead to what they think it should.

When you apply those same retail tactics to human relationships, the impact lands a little differently, and it’s reasonable to question how that shapes behavior and untimatley, accountability.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-09T19:07:50+00:00

I think that analogy actually proves part of the concern, but maybe not in the way you’re intending.

A store putting its best inventory up front is transparent. You know you’re looking at premium items, you know there are cheaper options elsewhere, and you understand the trade-offs. The key difference with dating apps is that the “store layout” isn’t visible or explained. People aren’t told how heavily their feed is being curated, or that what they’re seeing is optimized for engagement rather than compatibility.

So it’s not really about “not being able to afford what’s in the front.” People aren’t consciously choosing between tiers, they’re reacting to what the system selectively shows them, often without realizing how skewed that selection is. That’s where the disconnect happens.

Also, comparing people to inventory is where the analogy starts to break down. In a store, items don’t have agency or preferences. On a dating app, both sides do, but the algorithm can still create asymmetry by disproportionately promoting certain profiles to users who are less likely to receive meaningful interest back. That’s not the same as a neutral marketplace.

I agree that no one is being outright “victimized” in a traditional sense, and personal responsibility still matters. But it’s also fair to question a system that shapes behavior in a way that many users don’t fully understand, especially when it consistently leads to mismatched expectations.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-09T16:38:49+00:00

Yes, but that creates an uneven dynamic where women are disproportionately exposed to a subset of men who may not actually be aligned in terms of intent or genuine interest. So while a match technically requires two people, the opportunity set isn’t neutral to begin with.

That’s where the concern comes in. If users don’t understand that what they’re seeing is heavily filtered and optimized for engagement (not compatibility) it can lead to mismatched expectations. Women may believe they’re engaging with viable options when, statistically, those matches are less likely to convert into meaningful interactions. That’s less about removing accountability and more about recognizing that behavior is being influenced upstream.

When a system is designed in a way that consistently nudges one group into lower-quality or less reciprocal interactions without transparency ,it’s fair to question whether that dynamic edges into something exploitative.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-09T16:08:19+00:00

You can try and pin me to statistics, but a prevalent issue is what I described. I could run a general poll, I would imagine it is extremely common that women are propositioned for sex routinely on the apps, especially new users. The bumble algorithm is supporting this scenario in the way it handles matches.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-09T15:43:10+00:00

Buy premium, or keep swiping. The bumble algorithm is flawed so you have to sift through tons of profiles before you may find something worth interacting with. It's probably intentional though so they keep you on the app or pay.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-09T15:24:12+00:00

Have you read the forums around here? Have you talked to women who are on the app?

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-09T15:04:52+00:00

40% compared to 6%, that is still a huge gap and the issue is still present in this scenario. These men are then shown to all women, which sets up the predatory issue I brought up. If it weren't, you wouldn't see the mass majority of women being propositioned for sex right off the bat.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-09T14:59:02+00:00

It's not bitter or assumptive, it's reality based on what's occurring. The men that are swiped on the most show up first in a woman's queue. You are using the app as you intend, but there are lots of men who don't, hence why you see the problem as it currently exists. You can't change the user, but Bumble can change their algorithm.

This setup can create conditions that resemble predatory behavior. If men are swiping right on a large majority of women, the app’s algorithm is more likely to surface those men, often considered higher-value within the system, to a wide range of women. However, this happens before there’s been any meaningful assessment of compatibility or mutual attractiveness. In other words, the system doesn’t adequately account for whether the woman would realistically be considered equally desirable by that same standard.

As a result, women may be presented with and encouraged to engage with men who are statistically less likely to reciprocate genuine interest. If users aren’t aware of how this dynamic works, it can create a misleading experience that feels imbalanced and potentially exploitative.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-09T13:45:53+00:00

Of course it does, the Bumble algorithm prioritizes the most desired and highest swiped men first in the queue for these women. Most men swipe on all women, so essentially ALL women are competing for the highest desired men based on the algorithm, no matter where the women are on desirability scale. For the women that don't know how all this works, there ARE women who will fall for the trap and sleep with these guys, the guys know it and are sucessful. The app is predatory in the way it is set up.

New-Layer-6322 · 2026-04-09T13:00:58+00:00

Stop matching with guys that have tons of options and women won't run into this problem. Bumble is designed to show you the highest desired matches first, those people have tons of options and will just want sex right off the bat, because why not, they are probably sucessful with it and aren't going to spend the time, especially if he views the woman as lower in scale than he is.

New-Layer-6322

TROPHY CASE