Well we’re back after a long absence. We had problems with the code on our website and we have been hard at work fixing everything. AstraMatch website should also be back on air soon too – stay tuned!

[Read more...]

Today I would like to explore Jungian typology.  The rules of attraction are a lot more complicated & complex than the models that have been used by eharmony & Chemistry.com as I have mentioned in past posts in this series.  (See links below)

“Oh, how powerfully the magnet of illusion attracts.” Gutzkow

[Read more...]

Today I tried OkCupid.com’s relationship assessment - it was quick, easy & had very interesting questions that I have not seen in other assessments.  The results are stereotypes & very general.  This assessment is obviously focused on fun rather than genuine matching.  Also, I would question some of reasoning & logic behind their assessment with questions such as:

[Read more...]

Singlesnet.com are at present one of the top in the polls for online dating sites in the US, so I thought I would do a review of their relationship assessment.  I called this post ‘No Review of Singlesnet.com Relationship Assessment as contrary to what they advertise on their homepage, there doesnt seem to be any access to any matching assessment or algorithm?

[Read more...]

I am fascinated with the shift when we meet people for real, with whom we originally connected with virtually. By virtual, I include the phone along with the web. Of course this is what the online dating sites have been struggling with for years – how to make that shift less traumatic and disappointing? I have found from past experiences myself, that a lot of interest and excitement can be generated in connecting with certain people online and on the phone. However when we meet, there is a shift to another level that has not been addressed virtually. Of course the odds are stacked against these levels matching the real, live experience of another or at the very least, offering real potential of connection. If virtual operates through the mind, then we have a lot to catch up with on other levels, when we meeting for real. Often real-ationships have to be reworked from the virtual or in some cases abandoned altogether.

The word virtual used to mean “influencing by physical virtues or capabilities,” from M.L. virtualis, from L. virtus “excellence, potency, efficacy,” lit. “manliness, manhood”. The meaning of “being something in essence or fact, though not in name” is first recorded 1654, probably via sense of “capable of producing a certain effect” (1432). Computer sense of “not physically existing but made to appear by software” is attested from 1959.
The word real however seems to have always meant “relating to things” (esp. property), from O.Fr. reel, from L.L. realisres “matter, thing,” of unknown origin. Meaning “genuine” is recorded from 1559; that of “actually existing” is attested from 1597; sense of “unaffected, no-nonsense” is from 1847. “actual,” from L.

[Read more...]