[safety1st]

They're not less important, they're table stakes. Is there wiggle room, sure. Maybe sometimes people are capable of being a little more flexible on these things than they realize.

But for example, I think this is true of just about everyone: there's an age range that they're willing to date within, and outside of that range, everyone is a hard pass.

I wouldn't date someone who was twice my age, no matter how great their personality was, it's an absolute no.

Similarly if we use BMI as a proxy for attractiveness. This one may be a little more controversial but I suspect just about everyone has a BMI range they are comfortable with, and if someone is far enough outside of that range, there is no chance, no matter what anyone says, that you are going to date them.

I agree that most dating platforms are hostile to their customers but I think the issues there run much deeper. They all have incentives to _keep you engaged with their platform for as long as possible_, that is how they make the most money. They don't make money by finding you a partner. They are really just social media that can charge a monthly membership fee.

[Scandiravian]

I don't see OP arguing against people having those preferences, only that focusing on those attributes will lead to a lower likelihood of successfully finding a relationship

A relationship where one or more participants are unempathetic and uncommunicative is at higher risk of ending than one on the other side of the spectrum, regardless of how attractive each of the partners are

[O__________O]

Agree, though it’s not just that focusing that having relationship skills is a predictor of long term success in relationships, but that people that focus first on non-relationship skills tend to also have poor relationship skills.

Beyond that, main thesis is that relationships skills are largely shared between platonic and non-platonic relationships and that if there was a social network where 50% or more of relationships were based on platonic relationships, that there “relationship score” would be baked into evaluation for potential dates; basically, unless you had significant non-platonic relationship score, you would not be able to unlock dating on the platform and as result, it would be a friends first network; though to be clear, once dating was unlocked as result of achieving a meaningful “relationship score” users would be able to just go on dates.

[O__________O]

What I don’t hear you acknowledging is that partners without relationships skills are significantly less likely to last — or for that matter, that you even value relationships skills. If you don’t, that’s fine, but you to me are both missing my core point and also in my opinion much less likely to actually end up in a meaningful relationship.

[safety1st]

You aren't hearing me acknowledge those things because I have not agreed to enter into a relationship with you where you coach me, or frankly one where you have any involvement in my personal life whatsoever. I am not interested in having that with you, so please do not presume.

This is a forum for hackers and entrepreneurs. You are an entrepreneur who has run a string of dating startups. I am informing you about the preferences which exist in this market. You believe these preferences to be wrong. I think there may be business advantage for you in recognizing that those preferences are real and not wrong.

[O__________O]

Acknowledging alternative perspectives has nothing to do with agreeing with them or for that matter, partaking in them.

Also, obviously aware that significant percentage of people focus on attributes that are a poor predictor of long term success in a relationship and have zero desire to engage that market; not to mention you falsely assume that your definition of an entrepreneur is same as mine.

Lastly, happy to be proven wrong, but majority of HN is neither a hacker or entrepreneur, but just people that are curious people interested in being around other curious people.