<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Randy Weber &#187; eHarmony</title>
	<atom:link href="http://randyweber.com/blog/index.php/category/eharmony/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://randyweber.com/blog</link>
	<description>a.k.a. World Wide Weber</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 03:30:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>The Sad Truth About Online Personals Sites</title>
		<link>http://randyweber.com/blog/2010/02/06/the-sad-truth-about-online-personals-sites/</link>
		<comments>http://randyweber.com/blog/2010/02/06/the-sad-truth-about-online-personals-sites/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:56:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Randy Weber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet biz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Match.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eHarmony]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[humor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[online dating]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yahoo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://randyweber.com/blog/?p=421</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Having spent some time working in the online personals biz and having used most all of the sites both personally and professionally, I can tell you that the following joke ad from College Humor is dead on. It&#8217;s especially true for the smaller sites like the ones that have the racy ads on Facebook.

Your best [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Having spent some time working in the online personals biz and having used most all of the sites both personally and professionally, I can tell you that the following joke ad from <a title="College Humor - If People On The Internet Told The Truth" href="http://www.collegehumor.com/article:1800153" target="_blank">College Humor</a> is dead on. It&#8217;s especially true for the smaller sites like the ones that have the racy ads on <a title="Facebook" href="http://www.facebook.com/" target="_blank">Facebook</a>.</p>
<p><img class="aligncenter" title="College Humor - Online Personals Ad" src="http://randyweber.com/images/personals_satire.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="305" /></p>
<p>Your best best is sticking with the major players like <a title="Yahoo! Personals" href="http://personals.yahoo.com/" target="_blank">Yahoo</a>, <a title="Match.com" href="http://www.match.com" target="_blank">Match</a>, and <a title="eHarmony" href="http://www.eharmony.com/" target="_blank">eHarmony </a>(personally I dislike eHarmony, but it works for a lot of people). Some of the niche sites are OK too, like <a title="JDate" href="http://www.jdate.com" target="_blank">JDate</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://randyweber.com/blog/2010/02/06/the-sad-truth-about-online-personals-sites/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Yahoo Upgrades Personals</title>
		<link>http://randyweber.com/blog/2006/12/21/yahoo-upgrades-personals/</link>
		<comments>http://randyweber.com/blog/2006/12/21/yahoo-upgrades-personals/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:56:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Randy Weber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet biz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Match.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eHarmony]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[online dating]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yahoo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://randyweber.com/blog/2006/12/21/yahoo-upgrades-personals/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Techcrunch digs into a new feature launched by Yahoo Personals. The feature allows users to customize the way search queries are returned to them. It&#8217;s about time. I love this feature. I wish more players would do this. While it could go much further, it&#8217;s a step in the right direction. It will make my [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/" target="_blank">Techcrunch</a> digs into a <a title="Yahoo customizes search results" href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/20/yahoo-upgrades-personals-does-this-stuff-work/" target="_blank">new feature launched by Yahoo Personals</a>. The feature allows users to customize the way search queries are returned to them. It&#8217;s about time. I love this feature. I wish more players would do this. While it could go much further, it&#8217;s a step in the right direction. It will make my time on YP much more efficient.</p>
<p>Another point made in the article involves physical attraction and is a dig on eHarmony. For the record &#8211; looks matter and eHarmony sucks.</p>
<blockquote><p>Certainly this stuff helps some people find a match. But basic human nature seems to be more visual when it comes to attraction. People don’t necessarily want to fill out an excrutiatingly <a onclick="javascript:urchinTracker ('/outbound/www.eharmony.com');" href="http://www.eharmony.com/"><strong><font color="#00a700">long</font></strong></a> personality profile to help them sort through potential matches, then to find out there’s no physical attraction.</p></blockquote>
<p>Kudos to Yahoo. If we get those users off of eHarmony and onto Yahoo and Match, the matchmaking world will be a much better place.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://randyweber.com/blog/2006/12/21/yahoo-upgrades-personals/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.237 seconds -->

