This suggestion was generated during a recent meeting I led, and I absolutely loved it.
What if when filling out your profile you did a simple personality test, something that might imitate a Myers-Briggs that weighs certain couchsurfing “variables” instead of the classic ones. (I.e, instead of introvert/extrovert, feeling/thinking you could do host/guest, organizing/attending, friendly/flirty, careful/spontaneous) or any other combination of typical traits. Of course you could take the test as much as you like if you’re not exactly pleased with the outcome, and there wouldn’t be any Inherently bad variables.
If we could pull this off, I feel like we’d have something…
Super unique in the hospex context, could even go a bit viral among the communities, especially reeling back those who have moved on from hospex
that Could help in weeding out low-effort users (aka dating spammers) who would not want to fill out a questionnaire or put much thought into the sign up
could give users another way to filter for likeminded people (or opposites!)
If I’m a Spontaneous Flirty Organizing Host, maybe I’d be happier spending time with a Careful Flirty Attendee Guest. Just an example but omg, cute. At the same time, if you’re a Careful Friendly Organizing Guest, you might seek more of the same so that you can organize together.
We have often talked about what might attract more women to the platform and I gotta say this was a huge hit with my female-identifying network. If it’s something we could consider doing I could see it adding a lot of fun, and perhaps even a more lighthearted and whimsy aspect.
Special shout out to @aleehnay who originally floated this idea!
I would want to be able to ignore it because personality tests are more of a ‘fun’ thing and are only of limited use in actually telling you what someone is like.
I’d personally go even further than ignoring it - I wouldn’t want it to be too prominent. Like not in search results
I’m not a low-effort user, but I’m concerned about privacy and don’t like feeding databases. If it would be part of the sign-up or framed as a general indicator on how comitted I am to hospex, it would probably drive me away from the entire platform
I’m also not so convinced how a lighthearted and whimsy approach will work. At the same time we put a lot of effort into filtering out abusive users. In the end we end up with a lighthearted self-painted portrait on the front and a community painted portrait of all the possibly inherently bad variables on the back? So someone sees themselves as the attentive flirty host, but they are also an unhinged creep?
While that’s your opinion and a lot of people may have it, I absolutely disagree. A carefully planned questionnaire with variables that pertain directly to people’s typical behavior can be really useful. There’s a reason that workplaces, counselors, and schools use these kinds of tests!
Think out of the box here, guys. On another thread people are suggesting that a “Didn’t expect sex” option to be left by a reviewer is better than asking a new user from the get go if they’d be interested in hooking up? I don’t see how the former prevents any unwanted contact, while the latter could help people avoid “types” they don’t like while still being fun and not condescending.
Well that’s kinda the point. Anyone who answers questions to get the flirty stamp is probably going to be avoided by people who would find that creepy. Meanwhile, other unhinged creeps have a better chance at finding each other… ha ha ha
Here are some more sample kind of questions, sorry if the examples I gave before seemed to outlandish for your conservative tastes
Responses would be “agree/neutral/disagree” styles
I would enjoy spending time with my hosts
I prefer to do my own thing when I travel
I would be comfortable sharing a sleeping surface with my guest / host
I like to party / am interested in nightlife
Yeah you can argue that you wouldn’t want to share this kind of personal information or “populate a database” but why would we store it? Your type could be generated and the data erased
I definitely see the motivation here, but I really don’t see this playing out in any way other than everyone saying that they’re not flirty. E.g. women with a ‘flirty’ label get bombarded with requests from men, most turn it off. Men turn it off as it turns everyone away.
Unfortunately the reason is marketing There is little evidence to support the popular tests (e.g. Myers Briggs) have validity. I worry the same thing would happen here if we were to basket people into categories that aren’t really true. Also people are notoriously wrong about judging their own behaviour on these kind of tests.
Aren’t these the kind of questions are ones we’d more want to see answered on profiles?
I’m not necessarily against something like this, especially if it’s something that would improve the experience for women. I just think it’s something that needs to be really well thought out, especially seeing that I think a lot of people would be reluctant to fill it out
Same with me. But reluctance to fill it out will also be about extrovert-introvert tastes. If you’re more extrovert you probably enjoy putting out a lot of self-assigned information upfront. Introverts can find this just intimidating and tend to overthink it as well. Like when I tick/say I like to go out, then I’ll have to live up to it, though I actually don’t know if I’ll be in the mood at all…
Anyways, will erase this personal information about myself after it generated a response
These kind of questions seem like they could be good!
I don’t understand what you mean. I was reading Itsi’s comment as saying the people who should have said “I am flirty” will just lie, defeating the purpose.
This is a bit of an unfair statement to make. I’ll be honest, I understand the concept behind this idea, but if it was in place, I wouldn’t partake in it - not because I have shady intentions, but I’m just not interested in being matched to users that way.
But you know, it’s kind of a personal thing and maybe it’s an idea worth exploring in the future, if enough people think it could work.
I don’t see it as being “matched” at all. It would just be a a quick way for you to see some added details about the person, like if they see themselves as particularly social or if they are less likely to show you around.
Think of it as a quick snapshot into how they use the platform.
Look I don’t see why we have to complicate things.
When you sign up to Couchers.org for the first time to create your profile ask the following: (example)
Are you intending to use this site to potentially hook up with Guests?*
Yes
No
*please note that depending on the answer on this question we will either be matching your profile with potential hosts/guests, or not.
If answered NO , would you like that we remove all profiles who answerd to YES from your search results, and from you coming up in search results for those who answered YES?
It can probably be polished up a bit, but basically, no need to beat about the bush. We are honest, trustworthy, and transparant, lets be just that.
?
edit: I don’t know why there is a change in font type, but please ignore it =)
Yeah, I mean from what I have read in the different forums is that people are still open to that idea and will still use it for hooking up, or at least not be against a hook-up if it happened.
I don’t think people would lie in this very basic question: the only “penalty” they will receive is just being blocked from users who are not interested in that kind of experience, and if anything that is an advantage for them and their intentions. It could at leat let us internally note who to flag as high-risk creep, but then genuine folk might click yes cause, heck, why not!
This is certainly the way to move forward, and I will continue this brainstorm!
I really like this idea! This would be a fun little mechanic that gives people more options on how they want to present themselves.
I do agree with others that it should be optional so that people can have more control over what they do or do not share on their profile/some people might not be comfortable boiling themselves down into pre-chosen personality traits. But it could be a fun thing to have on your profile for those who opt in.
Personally I don’t think people lying about themselves (making their personality say “friendly” instead of “flirty” to not scare people away) is actually an issue, since this is an extra feature. People are already lying about being friendly rather than flirty when they choose how to word their messages to people in their surf/host/hangout requests. So the issue already exists, regardless, at a deeper level, and I don’t think adding this layer would necessarily cause extra concern. I don’t see how it would enable creeps anymore than they are already enabling themselves…
Would you be able to see people’s answers tot he questions in addition to the personality traits results? Because while I don’t agree that the actual result you get say enough about who you are for someone to make a proper judgment, the actual answers you give to particular questions could.
If you do that, you literally make “being flirty” (aka: using the app to hook up) an option. A “legal” and valid option. That´s exactly what should never happen. Then creeps are going to say “why is it wrong that ïm hitting on you? It´s in my profile that I am flirty, you knew it, that´s what I´m here for” Mmmmhhh heck NO. I don´t want that to be an option. From the hundreds of apps, CS was the only one where I could go ahead and meet with only one male for any activity, even for a beer, feeling safe that he was not going to hit on me… ok: creeps are gonna creep, but mostly guys were super cool and respectful of that rule, and we could hang out and make friends safely. I want that. I want to feel safe that noone is going to think that they have a green light to hit on me. We need to reinforce this idea, not make that attitude ok among certaing people, because that´s going to spill into the rest of the community.
There is little evidence to support the popular tests (e.g. Myers Briggs) have validity. I worry the same thing would happen here if we were to basket people into categories that aren’t really true. Also people are notoriously wrong about judging their own behaviour on these kind of tests.