[FourToTheFloor]

If you were going to design a popular dating site, muck like OKCupid, what steps would you take to surreptisiously combat hypergamy?

Of course, the obvious and most simple of which is to systematically undervalue the women's attractivenes, but what else remains?

[RandalGraves]

Well, for one, limit the amount of messages that men can send out... maybe like 5 messages per day, maximum.

[kbell]

Have strict rules about photos. And make it very clear if they have kids are not.

[FourToTheFloor]

These are good ideas guys.

Perhaps forcing everyone to list their weight?

[Faust]

A program that scans women's profiles for words like "Independent", "Sassy", and "Sarcastic." Use too many and you'll be booted off the site.

[the Dagda]

^

Women who list their twitter, facebook or instagram pages get IP banned instantly

Women are required to take a full body "mugshot" every morning and post it

Women have to list every single thing they are going to eat that day

Women who dare to say "if you can keep up with me/ handle me" receive a shock from the hamster collar that is mandatory with the site

Women either have to reply to or report whoever messaged them

[WestIndianArchie]

(01-06-2013 10:34 PM)FourToTheFloor Wrote:  

If you were going to design a popular dating site, muck like OKCupid, what steps would you take to surreptisiously combat hypergamy?

It's called seeking arrangement isn't?
- chicks hot
- guys alpha

WIA

[Nonpareil]

All women are required to list their height and their weight (because 140 lbs. on 5'2 is fat, but on 5'11 it's pretty nice) and if they have any kids.

A programmed-in BMI calculator denies registration for any women over 25 BMI. For added funnies, a message accompanies this saying 'I'm sorry, but you're too fat to be here, hit the gym!'

Looking for: A relationship, a purely sexual relationship, a husband, a sugar-daddy...none of this looking for friendship shit we sometimes see (if you aren't looking for a boyfriend or a fuckbuddy, why are you on an online dating site, sweetie?).

All women are required to update their photo once monthly. Photos must be full body, at a reasonably close distance and in a well-lit room.

No nudges, winks, post likes or any other of the validation quick hits that sites commonly have.

Women get kicked off the site if they flake on more than three occasions.

Word filter changes: Feminist (cunt), sarcastic (shitty sense of humor), Snarky (backtalks), quirky (weird), nerd (average-looking), curvy (fat).

Limit the amount of messages men can send, brilliant, make it three a day. Take it one-step further; women have to respond to all messages (and can respond negatively or positively) and you can't message the same woman more than three times.

Maybe a small series of graphics that men can add to women's profiles (that they can't remove); a snowflake (flake), dollar sign (gold-digger) and others.

[FourToTheFloor]

How about the women either have to reply, or check "not interested."

[the Dagda]

I forgot one and this is something that should be implemented in more popular dating sites:
ratio has to be 1:1

[Ensam]

Girls who prove they go out on at least one date per month with a member get a free membership (or some other reward).

[Kitsune]

This would never work.

You'd need a built in lie detector test, and probably an 'Eyes Wide shut' style venetian mask system.
That, and as with any online dating, you'd have to get rid of the dregs of omega-dom on both sides. Because of the no social stigma, any ugly overweight person can message the most beautiful of people. You could issue everyone a rating out of ten and then pyramid the amount of messages they could send to people higher up the table than them.