ClueChick: real clues from a real chick

Cluechick's advice is generally...well, general: applicable to all men seeking women for casual sex on the internet. However, since I'm standing in for her this week, and my interests are quite specific, I'm going to take the liberty of directing a post specifically to that subset of seekers who share my sexual proclivities: those into BDSM (Bondage/Discipline/Sadism/Masochism/Dominance/Submission/ Leather/Kink/whatever-the-heck-you-call-it.)

For the most part, the general advice applies equally well to BDSM oriented postings: be honest, be real, treat the woman like a person, let your personality show through, etc. But there are some things that are specific to this corner of the world.

Let's start with a few tips.

First of all, until we have agreed to play, do not address me as "slave", "Mistress" or "slut". Likewise, do not sign with "Sir" or "Master" or "your sissy slutboy". It's presumptuous and disrespectful. Whether I'm seeking a one-shot play session or a long term live-in 24x7 deal, I'm a person first, and a playtoy second.

Along the same lines, I wish to establish interest in one another before the power exchange begins. This is particularly directed at dominant men: starting off communications saying "Your email response should arrive in no more than 24 hours" or "You will refrain from using all capital letters henceforth" will quickly get your email tossed into the circular folder.

And speaking of capitals, the capitalization of pronouns is Just Stupid. Don't do it, okay? The words "me", "my", "you", "your", "him" and "her" are never capitalized unless they appear at the beginning of the sentence. "I am a Master with 24 years of experience. All My subs obey Me without question." This just screams "pretentious asshole". (And don't get me started on the slash thing. "When W/we meet W/we will discuss terms of engagement." Agh, just shoot me!)

A note to submissive men: paragraph upon paragraph telling me what a worthless worm you are will not entice me to write back. Even if I'm looking to piss in your mouth and grind my stiletto heel into your balls, I still want you to be confident, sexy and smart. Save the self-flagellation until after we're involved. Better yet, let me do the flagellation, otherwise why bother?

Phrases such as "true submissive", "natural dominant" and "old school" convey no useful content, so don't use them. What you mean by the terms is likely to have nothing to do with what I mean by the same terms, and assuming we've actually communicated something because we both think I'm a "true sub" is likely to lead to disappointment and recriminations on all sides. Really, the terms exist for no other purpose than to judge as inferior people whose desires in the scene do not match yours. So drop it, okay?

-Sapiophile

Posted by sapiophile at 6:58 PM in | Permalink | Comments (1)

Browse the CE board of any city and you'll see postings that include dollar signs. Some attempt to be subtle: "Cute girls get in touch $oon!" (hey, I did say attempt), and others don't bother: "Normal girl, get in touch $$$$." Offers of sugar-daddyism drift around (as does the occasional request for a sugar daddy) as well as explicit gift-giving, shopping trips and the like.

Of course, all of these are miscategorized on the CE board, but that's beside the point, because, well, they keep cropping up. I'm sure it won't surprise you all to know that I'm not impressed.

Sure, yes, casual sex market is really run by women, to a large degree, at least if you're not interested in hooking up with men (where you'll have a lot more success), and so, one presumes, the thinking goes, that if you can't stand out any other way, you can at least pump up your prospects by offering cash or other material rewards.

And the truth is, I'm not particularly against prostitution. But I do find the disengenuity of these ads annoying at best. My favorite of these is the one that said, "Non pro wanted! I'll pay $$$." Perhaps he's unclear on the concept of "professional". If you think that just because you're offering to pay on a free board, it doesn't count as a prostitution arrangement, you're wrong. And if you think it doesn't count because it's an ongoing thing and you trade shopping trips for blow jobs, you're wrong again. If that's what you want, fine, but at least be honest with yourself about what you're asking for and what you're getting.

And for the love of all the sex in the world, don't offer money to a woman who didn't hint at it in her ad. She might take it as an insult, and I promise, if she's anything like me, it won't get you a reply.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:37 AM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (0)

I'm going to take a few moments away from ClueChick's excellent advice on content to say something about style. Specifically, on the importance of writing with good use of grammar, punctuation and spelling.

Now, I'll admit right off the bat that I'm a grammar snob. I raise my eyebrows at misuse of "who" and "whom", and misplaced apostrophes really make me lose my appetite for love. But that isn't what I'm here to talk about. Not every net.slut cringes when someone says "your so hot". But I bet they all cringe when they get a message that screams "I couldn't even be bothered to take a few seconds to proofread my message!"

Let's look at some examples:

"u can email me at [...] i usually do not find unies and lingere sexy but your bosy suit is ok..." etc. (It got me pretty hot to be told my look is "ok" but that's a rant for another day)

"Ur are an interesting personality...I can't beliee wee match in our intrests.. I certainly like to fuck you hard as I can.....rip those clothes on..and taste that sweet pussy of urs...inf interested let me know..."

Now first, I think lots of women who aren't grammar snobs think "u r 2 hot" kind of writing is eyerollworthy. But let's move on to "unies" "beliee" and "bosy" (which took me several seconds until I realized he was talking about the body suit I was wearing in the pic.) What do these tell me other than the fact that he didn't consider me worth to effort to care about his first impression, to take the few seconds it would take to fix stupid errors. If he thinks "casual" means "not worth any effort" I'm not anticipating his sexual skills to be up to par either.

Oh, and please avoided the dreaded run-on sentence and upper case letters (WHICH ARE SHOUTING!)

"i love to please so cum and let me please you 29 years old 5'9" big love sex especially oral sex so if you want a man who enjoys taking his time to really get you off as much as possible then get in touch thick headed uncut cock"

"LOVE YOUR PICS YOUR JUST MY TYPE..I CAN MAKE YOU CUM AS MCH AS U WANT..CALL ME [...] OR IM [...] CANT WAIT TO INTRODUCE YOU TO MY BIG COCK"

Really, do these guys expect me to want to MEET them???

- Sapiophile

Posted by sapiophile at 8:49 PM in ground rules | Permalink | Comments (5)

Our esteemed Cluechick is on the road for a few weeks, so she asked me, Sapiophile, to fill the gap here with a couple entries of my own.

The biggest difference between Cluechick and me: she's much nicer and more forgiving than me. So don your asbestos suits, and gear up for today's topic: names.

"What's in a name?" Juliet asked. Her conclusion: "It is nor hand, nor foot, Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part Belonging to a man." But she's wrong; in the world of the Internet, one's name is one's face. So just as you would not (we hope) show up to a first date with jelly smudged around your mouth, don't wear a stupid name in public. This applies to both handles you select on dating sites, and on chosen email names.

Before I suggest how to pick a good one, let's take a look at some categories of real life bad examples:

Boring: Paul14, NYCguy, mikey1963, SirMark --
this is the best category of bad names. These aren't going to hurt you, but they make you forgettable, which is a bad thing when you are trying to stand out in that hot woman's inevitable flood of responses. (Here's a clue: if the system you pick a name on tells you that yourname, yourname1, yourname2, and yourname342 are taken, that's a hint that it isn't very original.)

Cliche: lonelyguy, looking4luv, BBWluvr22, curiousmale66 -- okay, these may have the advantage of saying more about you than "Joe493" does, but they leave your target chick yawning from your lack of creativity. At least they aren't as bad as...

Stupid: BigCock4U, cum4me, SirHardOne, HornyPig, 9InchesOfLove, hotbod3 -- you might as well hold up a sign that says "I'm a big doofus" as wear one of these names. These names are remarkably popular with the guys and yet...I've yet to find a single woman who finds them appealing, or even funny (beyond a "Haha, what a doofus!") So if you had been considering using "wellhungguy", just quit now, okay?

The very best names are those that are original, say something about who you are, and ideally provide another starting point for conversation. You can't have too many ice breakers.

I just did a quick look around some of the systems I'm on and found some names that appeal to me (or at least fail to turn me off):
- stradivarius (the name of a famous line of violins) - suggests to me education and an artistic bent, maybe a musician
- honeydewmelon - made me chuckle and makes me wonder if he's sweet
- xreipar - no idea what this means, but it looks like it has a story behind it, and I'd ask him in our first email exchange
- TatooedDude - kind of lame but the rhyming is cute and at least it tells me something about him
- cocopocoloco - making me laugh is a good start
- ChaosTheory72 - the name is original enough that I'm guessing '72' is his birth year, not how many guys chose "chaostheory" before him. I could be wrong though.
- LemonDaddy - is that the opposite of a sugar daddy?
- trifecta - this one would have been even better if he's been looking for a foursome

Try to find a name that will be amusing, informative, intriguing or all three. Or at very least, try to avoid being tagged a dork by labelling yourself "StudMuffin22".

Tomorrow's Sapiophile's Cluechick Gap-filling topic: why grammar matters

Posted by sapiophile at 12:58 PM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (3)

Yesterday, in my conference, someone brought up the issue of how important it is to be sincere in order to attract clients (no, really, this is my work conference), and I was struck by how true this is for dating as well. (See? Even when I'm working, I'm thinking about you all, my faithful readers. I thought about you while drinking a mojito after work, too.)

In many ways, the online dating scene is, more or less, a matter of marketing. You're the product, and you need to sell yourself. Or you're the institution and you need to attract clients. Or whatever riduculous metaphor strikes your fancy and makes you think of creative ways to make yourself stand out without looking ridiculous or using terms like "synergy" or "value-added".

Sincerity is a good way to make yourself appealing. I like it when a guy is sincere because I like it when I feel I can believe what someone is saying to me. I like to have the sense that his attraction to me is real. That makes it a compliment rather than an act or something that's all for show.

So I spent the afternoon thinking about what someone can do to show that he's sincere, and though I hate to admit it, I'm a bit stymied. I know it when I see it, but I don't know how to describe it and certainly not how to fake it.

On the other side of the coin, I also know when I'm really feeling sincere as opposed to when I'm just putting on a show. And when I pay attention to my internal state, to whether I'm sincerely feeling interest in what a fellow is saying, it tells me about my gut response to him. Sincerity is a clue not just to the person you're interacting with but to you, yourself.

Now that's added value!

Posted by ClueChick at 9:52 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (0)

I wrote yesterday in How to say no, thanks about ways to pass on continued contact with someone you meet online, and Sapiophile made a useful comment on my interpretation of one fellow's awkward and pointless dance around saying he wasn't interested in me:

He feels guilty for being shallow for not being attracted to you. He thinks he should't be focused on looks, but he is, and all the verbiage is his dance with his own superego. The dance should be done on his own time, not yours.

She's probably right. After all, I, too, have struggled with myself over hitting it off with a guy via email and then finding myself cold and dry after he sends me a photograph. I like to think I'm above that sort of thing, after all. Don't we all?

The truth is, however, that no one is. We all have our likes and dislikes and some of those play out in the realm of appearance.

Personally, I assume that some people I chat with will see my photograph and decide I'm not their type. I'm completely fine with that, because I also assume that people will send me photographs that I'm not attracted to, as well. If the email spark is strong enough, that's sometimes enough to make me take it to in-person, anyway, just in case, but sometimes I just go with the shallow, "Okay, no zing there," response and move on. Thus, in the way that most people think that others generally think the way they do, I think that others must also make a judgement based on my photographs and go from there, either interested or not.

As far as I'm concerned, this is a-ok. We're hooking up online, for goodness' sake. It's not lifelong commitment or picking the next president. Looks and attraction matter, and it's nothing personal if someone doesn't like my looks, just as it's nothing personal if I don't like yours.

If you've got issues with being shallow (or sometimes being shallow), bummer for you. But don't drag me into it!

Posted by ClueChick at 10:49 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (1)

Sometimes, after hundreds of emails into the ether, you hear back from someone whose ad you responded to, and you strike up a conversation. After the heady thrill of first contact fades, you come to realize that she is not the one. Not only is she not The One, but she's not even a possibility. Maybe her freckles remind you painfully of your high school crush. Perhaps her wholesome looks make you think of a grade school teacher and that just takes the wind out of your sails. Maybe her writing style grates on your nerves like fingernails on a chalkboard. Whatever it is, though after exchanging a few emails, it's become clear to you that this is going nowhere. How do you break it to her?

The classic, and absolutely easiest way is to stop responding to her emails. If things haven't gotten too far, this isn't even particularly rude, in my opinion, since it's simply part of the online dating game. It is, however, a bit of a coward's way out. (Not to say I've never taken this route. That's part of what lets me recognize just how cowardly it is, after all.)

But say you've had enough of a contact that you'd like to let her down a bit more gently, or give her an explanation. How do you do it?

Personally, I'm fond of the gentle but true approach. "I've enjoyed our conversations, but I don't feel the pull toward moving it forward," for example. This expresses appreciation for the effort that's gone into things up to this point without putting any blame on either party for the lack of motivation to continue. Another reasonable option is, "I'm really hoping to find someone who's into nose licking and having learned that you're only into licking ears tells me that we're on different pages. Good luck!" Etc.

I like these either as the rejecter or as the rejectee. They acknowledge the quality of the contact and the fact that both parties need to be satisfied in order to move things forward.

What I don't like are a) rude rejections and b) overly apologetic rejections. In the case of rude rejections, it's really obvious what's not to like. "You're ugly and your spelling sucks. I can't imagine why I'd want to fuck you!" is, after all, not particularly ambiguous. But the overly apologetic rejections drive me crazy! I've gotten two of these on different occasions, once after sending a photo and once after a series of emails. Here's one:

I am thinking that we might not be a good match. I am sure that you are going to think that I came to that decision based solely on the pictures that you sent me, which is only partially true.

There has to be a certain feeling that I get from women visually, and I just did not get it at all when I saw your pictures.

Please do not take that as an insult, because it is not. It is less about your looks, and more about my hang-ups. You are a very attractive person, but I am not getting the right feel about it.

I just have very particular tastes in shape and hair and skin coloring and so forth. And we seemed to miss on just about all of it this time around.

I get rejected often (haha) on-line and in real life because of my height and because of my age... and it never bothers me, and yet telling you this is harder than hearing it about myself from someone else. I hope that you can appreciate my being honest with you, even if you did not particularly like what I had to say.

Now, this is honest and claims a lot of the responsibility for himself, so why don't I like it? Because it's condescending. He could have saved himself and me a lot of time by simply saying, "Thanks for sending your photo. Unfortunatley, you're not my type. Good luck!" But instead he feels the need to do a lot of bolstering, which, frankly, is absurd. The implication is that I'll be crushed by his rejection (wrong) and that it'll be a major blow to my ego (again, wrong, though I'll grant that my ego is unreasonably large these days, so it could use some blowing. (Er, not like that, you pervs!))

Taking care of someone and being sensitive to their emotions is a good thing, but it's important to be reasonable in understanding when that's your place. If you haven't even met in person, it is, yes, your responsibility to be polite, but it is not your responsibility to cushion the blow of your rejection. Just say what you need to say and move on. Otherwise, you look like a tool.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:48 AM in actual responses | Permalink | Comments (2)

Flattery will get you everywhere.

Flattery is a great way to get a woman's attention, but if you go overboard, it begins to look ridiculous as well as insincere. What do I mean?

One of the fellows who contacted me via Yahoo! Personals started out with a couple of nice compliments on my profile and photographs, and then ramped up to talking about how gorgeous and sexy and brilliant and everything great I am, and before we'd chatted for five minutes, he was telling me he thought I was The One. Either he was crazy or he was lying, and either way, you can imagine my reaction.

Not all insincere flatterers are quite that over-the-top, but in many cases, they're nearly so! Even the ones that go on and on about how great I am begin to be boring before too long.

A bit of flattery is nice, but if you take it too far, it's no longer believable. One fellow said to me in IM, "If I tell you you're sexy, would you hold it against me?" My response: If you say that before we meet, you bet I will!

Furthermore, excessive flattery makes you look like a kiss-up. You don't have to play hard-to-get, but you don't have to crawl after me begging for a scrap of attention, either.

A bit of good flattery to start with is specific to the person you're flattering, and it's reasonable relative to the information that you already have. Something you could write might be:

- "I found you ad extremely provocative and intriguing! I'd love to hear more about what you like to do with rubber bands and chap stick!"
- "Your photograph had me weak in the knees; I can't wait to see you in person!"
- "I'm a sucker for a woman with brains, so it's a good thing I was sitting down when I read your post."
- "You know, the way you write, you sound so hot! You wouldn't happen to be Cluechick, would you?"

(Okay, maybe you ought to skip that last one...)

Posted by ClueChick at 6:52 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (1)

So, this guy did enough of the right things (we all know what they are, right? He wrote an intelligent, appealing response to my ad that indicated that he was interested in me, not just any woman who might have posted that day, etc), for me to write back, initially, and then, after several emails back and forth, seeming to connect in interesting ways, I was inspired to arrange to meet him. He lives on the other side of town from me, but he was willing to come to my neighborhood to meet for lunch.

We met at my favorite local coffee shop and then went across the street to the diner for lunch. His assured email persona was much more timid in person, which seems to be a common feature, and one I can understand; interactions online carry a lot less risk, and they're also easier, because they're so one-dimensional, just text on a screen. However, this shift is one of the things that is a big turnoff for me; I tend to prefer confident people to begin with, and then when the lack of confidence in person contrasts with the prior confidence online, it's just not pretty.

But then things went downhill, because his primary topic of conversation is how he used to hang out with all these people who are interested in bands, and he's gone beyond that, and what he likes about me is that I seem like someone who would be really good for him to know.

...

I like to think that I'm a good person to know, and that I can help my friends with all sorts of growth and changes in their lives. This is not, however, the dynamic I want in my casual sex. I want someone to find me good in bed, but not necessarily "good to know" in the sense of major personal change, like finding a whole new friends group.

The conversation continued into how he's really finding out who he is and trying to meet new people who can help him with that...

It was soon clear that when I said "casual encounters", he read "new guide on life path". I'm not sure how that happened, but it did. Lunch was, thus, rather awkward. But it wasn't very awkward until he asked if I wanted to spend the afternoon with him (earlier, I had, foolishly, mentioned that I had the afternoon free). I don't mind turning people down, and I try to do so gently -- "I've really enjoyed meeting you, but I don't see this going anywhere" -- but there's no good way to keep the conversation going after that, obviously, and so I like to have that exchange after we've payed the check.

So, guys, save yourselves some awkwardness and hold the "what next" conversation until you're actually moving on to what next.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:40 PM in cluechick encounters | Permalink | Comments (2)

Open letter to IM boy:

Dear IM boy,

You certainly do seem quite nice, and I'm sure that you would be as fun in bed as you promise, but when I look at pictures of you, I can't help thinking of college boys (which you are) and how much I didn't really go for them even when I was in college. I know that it's not fair to judge someone just on his age, though, which is why I continued to chat with you after our first couple of emails.

You have, however, backed up my ageism, through your incessant insistence that if I would just let you drop by between classes, you're "sure we'd have fun." That was even okay in our early conversations, but now that I have told you, in no uncertain terms, that I have no interest in meeting you, I'm afraid your IMs are beginning to sound a tad... well... desperate.

Of course, it's great that you think I'm hot; I can't think of a woman who doesn't like to hear that, of course. And while it's true that I require my lovers to find me hot, that's actually only one of the things I look for in a partner, even a fuckbuddy type partner.

Perhaps contrarily, I like to think that the people I take to bed don't need me to take them to bed. I like to imagine that they could pick up someone else if it didn't work with me. I like to think they are choosing me, rather than needing me. And so, three months of forlorn IMs asking if I'm free does not work in your favor.

I do wish you luck in your future endeavors, and I encourage you to lay off the high pressure routine, for starters.

Distantly,
Cluechick

Posted by ClueChick at 6:57 AM in IMs , snarky | Permalink | Comments (0)

For part of the next couple of weeks, I will be out of town and somewhat sporadically online at all, which makes it an excellent time to introduce my first guest blogger: sapiophile. Those of you who pay attention to the comments here already know that she's brilliant and insightful, and that she has a lot of good observations to share with you all. You don't know that she's one of my closest friends and has had some adventure of her own. I hope to be able to post almost every day, but even if I don't get on at all, I know you'll be in good hands while I'm away!

Posted by ClueChick at 11:37 PM in Administrativa | Permalink | Comments (0)

This response came in this afternoon on a personals site. In my profile, I say that I'm in my late 20s and looking for someone within 10 years of my age. I also, as almost always, specify that smarts are desirable.

try me you don't have to look elsewhere. i'm everything you want in one pkg. maybe a little older. look at it this way much better than the rest. i'll dojusy about anything for you try me what do you hane to lose accept time. i'm better than most 45-50 yr olds lets chat

His profile lists his age as 62.

I am pained.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:48 PM in actual responses , snarky | Permalink | Comments (0)

One of my clever readers wrote in with a few questions, including this one:

Best experience you've had meeting someone through CL, worst?

It's actually kind of hard to pick out one best (or one worst, for that matter) experience, because different encounters with different guys have different outstanding qualities. In fact, this might be best as a series, perhaps with updates when someone else good (or bad) comes along to talk about.

My most recent great experience was in meeting up with a fellow who responded to an ad I posted at the beginning of the month. I recognized his email address as one I'd corresponded with about six months ago, and I mentioned as much in my response to him. Our earlier email exchange had petered out when we didn't manage to make plans within a week of starting our contact, and I hadn't felt strongly enough about him to follow it up that time.

In his email to my post this month, he came across as confident and assured, smart and looking for the same sort of thing I am. Between that and the fact that I'd decided in the past that I'd be up for meeting him (and reviewing our prior conversation, I could see why), I decided it would be worth trying again.

He indicated that he'd like to make plans sooner rather than later to meet up, rather than drag out the email contact, which suited me fine, in this case. Sometimes, I dislike someone who rushes things, because it feels premature to me, but because we'd laid some groundwork last year, this felt reasonable to me. So, we made plans and then didn't have any more email conversation, which was also a bit unusual; usually people like to do a bit of "getting to know you" via email first. The result was I didn't know all that much about him before meeting up over coffee downtown.

I got to the coffee shop early (I like to be there early, so I can sit and let him do the approaching. Lazy? You bet! But believe it or not, I'm a bit shy.) He found me without trouble (one of the things I hear on about 50% of my meet-ups is, "You look just like your pictures!") and we chatted. It turns out, that he's into a few things that are close to my heart, including travel, which is a great conversation topic. I love it when I can avoid the boring, rote questions like, "So, what do you do?"

About halfway into our conversation, I decided that I totally wanted to take him to bed. That's always a good thing in a meet-up! He was attractive, sexy, friendly and personable. The conversation flowed with the occasional innuendo and increasing flirtation. Apparently, he decided the same, and offered to show me the view from his apartment. Actually, he told me it was the best view of the city I've ever had, and what would I like to wager on it? This was a humorous and sexy way to a) get me to his apartment and b) imply I'd owe him something once there. Since I'd already decided I was hot for him, I didn't need the bet, but I enjoyed the banter.

It turns out, it was the best view of the city that I've ever had (and probably ever will have). The view, of course, was just a bonus.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:49 AM in cluechick encounters | Permalink | Comments (3)

I'm not intentionally picking on the baby people, here, it's just that their posts leap out at me as some of the most mind-boggling:

Looking for a responsible person for to become a parent! - m4w - 37

Do you want to have a child? I do not have any children and i wanted to see if anyone was interested in having one. I will exchange information and look forward to hearing from you!

Now, if you want a kid, more power to you, and if you want to find someone online to share that experience with, great! But... you're posting this in casual encounters! What the...?

Posted by ClueChick at 10:55 PM in real ads , snarky | Permalink | Comments (1)

One of my handsome and inquisitive readers asks:

What do your friends think?

Before I started my adventures on Craig's List, I was much more tame than I am, now. I tended to be involved in longer-term relationships with a lot of emotional content. About a year ago, I ended a big deal relationship, and I knew I wasn't going to want to be involved in a serious way with anyone for a while, where "a while" has yet to be determined. A couple of months after that breakup, though, I had my first one night stand, totally on the spur of the moment, and it turned out to be a lot of fun. I'd always thought that casual sex wasn't for me, but it turned out that I could enjoy it quite a bit. Thus was born a new phase in my relationship life, yadda yadda.

Most of my friends are (or were, at least) sluttier than I, so, for the most part, they've been extremely supportive about the whole thing, while simultaneously being quite amused. (I, by the way, use "slutty" as a positive descriptor.) I've gotten a lot of good advice from my friends, as well as the occasional, "Are you sure this is a good idea?" when I start to get a little too crazy.

In one case, a friend turns out to have disapproved so much that we're no longer friends. We never got to talk about it, so I don't know if it's that she disapproves of casual sex (despite having had a lot of it herself, but in her younger years) or of me (the previously rather pure friend) having it. I wouldn't have chosen for the friendship to go that way, but I definitely take a love me, accept my choices stance in my friendships.

I like it when my friends call me on my shit, or challenge me to think more critically about something I'm doing or how I'm doing it, but it's also important to me that they a) generally accept my choices and b) can live with it when I don't take their advice. That's true in any number of facets of my life, the ensluttification included.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:24 AM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (2)

To follow up on Where to meet the first time after chatting online and Taking things from erotic emails to in-person hookups, I want to talk a bit about the logistics of arranging the first meeting, taking the conversation from online to in-person.

The first thing to keep in mind, guys, is that you want to make it easy for her. If you can go to her neighborhood, so much the better. If you can go to her favorite restaurant or coffee shop, great! Putting up hurdles, like difficult places to meet, or very particular times, is not ideal. If I'm very interested in someone, I'm willing to go out of my way, but if I'm kind of on the edge and he's making it difficult for us to meet, I'll probably throw in the towel.

There was one guy I exchanged a total of maybe 200 emails with -- mostly one-liners -- over the course of a month. He looked attractive, we were into more or less the same things and seemed to be on the same page about what we were looking for -- but he was impossible to schedule with. I tend to be pretty busy, so scheduling ahead a few days or a week is often the only way to guarantee you get a slot in my schedule. He was more of a fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants kind of guy who didn't want to plan that far ahead.*

That meant that our only possible options were those rare occasions when I had a prior plan fall through on short notice. Okay, fine, that just means waiting a while, which is no problem for me, though I have found that this decreases the likelihood of a meeting actually happening, after a point. So he would drop me an email in the evenings on nights he had free (almost all of them) to see if I was around. If I was, I would respond, and he would commence trying to talk me into going to his house. I had, of course, explained how I prefer to meet in public, but he figured that hormones would convince me otherwise. (They didn't.)

Ultimately, this guy seemed both lazy and pathetic. It appeared that he wasn't getting any, wasn't willing to do much work to get any, and was holding out for something better, which obviously wasn't coming along, oddly enough.

Another thing about setting up a first meeting is this: don't put a lot of pressure on. No matter how hot your email exchange is, the first meeting is the real test. I hate it when a guy talks like it's a no-brainer that we're going to have as much bang in person as we do online, because there's no guarantee that that's the case, and it makes me cranky to have to put on the brakes. Being cautious is to your benefit, too, because, believe it or not, you might meet and decide you don't want to do her, in which case, backpedalling can be awkward.

Remember to exchange phone numbers before heading out to meet. You never know when traffic is going to suck and you or she will run late. It's nice to know that in such a contingency, you can let each other know that you're not standing the other up, just running late.

* A side note about this not-planning-ahead feature: After a couple of weeks, when it became clear that not planning ahead wasn't working well, I took this to mean that he didn't want to commit an evening to me, perhaps on the chance that some better offer would come up between now and then. Needless to say, if a woman gets this sense from you -- rightly or wrongly -- you're pretty much done as far as actually getting her into bed.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:28 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (0)

It's hard to explain exactly how to trip my trigger, because there are a number of ways, and they are all rather individual to the person and situation. As you all know, I like a smart, engaging guy with a good sense of humor, but, really, what on earth does that mean? Who doesn't want those things? Someone who's engaging to me might be offputting to another person, and let's not even go into the ways that a sense of humor can be good and yet still be hugely annoying to any number of people.

One of my favorite things in the world to do, however, is to flirt. I can't begin to tell you how much I love flirting. I like to flirt with friends, with acquaintances, with strangers. I like to think I only do it when it's appropriate, and I never take it to my day job, but nevertheless, I'm a big flirt.

Therefore, probably the number one way to catch my attention in email, IM and -- oh, yes, please -- in person, is to engage me in flirtation. This does not mean that you should give me some blatant come-on, because flirtation is all about hints and innuendos: eye contact, a casual touch on the elbow, a tilted head and suggestive comment. Mmmm, it's a delight just thinking about it!

In email, this means that you should jump on at least one opportunity to make a suggestive remark about something innocuous I said. It may also mean that you don't make a suggestive comment in response to something blatant that I say. You want to mix it up and keep it interesting, right? Flirting is about teasing. In IM, this means that you drop hints, but you don't take it all the way to netsex. (I enjoy a good round of netsex as much as the next person, if I happen to have the time and a free hand, but it's the anticipation that really gets me going and makes me want to take it to the next level.)

In person, well, it's hard to explain how to flirt in person. It requires a lot of attention to the other person's subtle signals. Start slow: extended eye contact is a good one. If the object of your flirtation looks down while blushing, and then re-engages the eye contact, you're good to go. If she doesn't re-engage, that's a bad sign. If she smiles when you touch her elbow or shoulder, that's an invitation for more of the same. If she pulls away, crosses her arms, or leans back... not so much.

Flirtation is like a dance. Sometimes you move forward, sometimes you draw back. The goal is to tease each other into a frenzy, until you can barely keep your hands off each other. Then you're ready to move on to the consummation.

Posted by ClueChick at 9:09 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (3)

I have a shameful little secret, but you all can't tell anyone, okay?

Sometimes, I respond to a lousy email that a guy writes to my ad. And I'm a little embarrassed to say that it's not always just snarky.

Okay, that's not entirely true. On occasion, I get a dumb response that, while dumb, is also somehow humorous. And if I'm bored, I may give in to the temptation to write back some smartassy comment about how brilliant and scintillating his email was. This, naturally, typically leads to a bit of email flying back and forth. It usually ends badly, with me telling him why he's not going to get any from me (he's dumb, lacks a sense of humor, is saying rude or disgusting things, etc. You pick.) Sometimes, I really drag it out. Never let it be said I can't be bitchy when I'm inspired and bored.

However, there's the every-once-in-a-while where my snarky opening gambit discovers someone who's actually intelligent, engaging and entertaining on the other end. Go figure. Usually, when I ask why he opened with such a dud, he says something about it just having been a whim to respond. I can understand that.

So, there have been a couple of times when a guy's crappy response got in the door and all the way up to a meeting. And, in fact, in one instance, all the way to my bed.

Since I spend so much time trying to get guys to write good, complete responses, why am I telling you this? Because the truth is, luck of the draw definitely plays into things on CL. That sometimes works out well for you, and sometimes poorly. As always, don't take it personally.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:40 PM in cluechick encounters | Permalink | Comments (0)

But do you have any advice for or thoughts about postings outside the usual m4w or w4m? We're a happily-married couple who met on CL and who both like having sex with women ... So, as a single woman, speaking for the smarter set of single women who enjoy CL CE, what's your advice for the less-traditional posting categories? More specifically, what would make you, a smart, sexual, single woman, interested in trying something outside your normal category?

Obviously, not all smart, sexual women posting to CL are bi (or even if not identifying as bi, at least willing to have some bisexual experiences), but a lot of them are, and it doesn't hurt to approach them.

Personally, I love nontraditional hookups. A recent fling commented, "You seem pretty frisky!" and it's true, I am. And I like trying new things, including play with couples. But, simultaneously, I'm quite leery of couples posting to pick up chicks, and I'll explain why.

They fall, typically, into three categories:

First, there are the couples where the guy thinks it would be really hot to be with two women, and he's almost got his wife convinced. If I turn out to be just the thing, maybe he'll actually get some hot girl-on-girl action. Yuck.

Second, there are the couples where they want a third body, but without having another person. I had a couple explain to me that they'd love to get together, but they only kiss each other, and they don't do any penetrative play with the third person. So, basically, I'm there to watch them fuck and to lick their favorite spots. Uh, no.

Third, and the only ones I would even consider sleeping with, are the couples where both partners are actively seeking out a third person, and they want to have someone who's fully participating, not necessarily in the relationship, but certainly in the activities in the bedroom.

If you are in the third category, how do you signal that to a prospective fuckbuddy? For starters, have the woman in your couple do the initial contact. There's nothing that convinces me that she's really, truly interested like actually hearing it from her mouth (or fingers, as the case may be). If you've had prior experiences along these lines, talk about them, what worked well, and what didn't, etc. In general, the same sorts of things that get me interested in a guy will get me interested in any other combination that's up my alley: interesting, engaging, smart people who connect with me as more than simply a collection of holes.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:20 AM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (0)

What is my window of time to reply? In other words, do I have to get a response out within the first hour of reading a post? Or within the first two hours? I'm just wondering if there's a point at which a woman will stop reading emails because she's just gotten too many.

This is an interesting question because I haven't thought too much about it. I'd say that there's no particular window, other than non-prime time being between 2 hours and 24 hours after it posted. After 2 hours, my inbox is usually quite full, and I've probably responded to a few to see how they are, so I shelf new responses during that time while waiting to see how the initial conversations go, unless the new response rocks my world.

I actually like the replies that come in a few days after posting an ad, and since, by then, the deluge has turned into a trickle, I actually pay those responses more individual attention than they would get at first glance in the early responses. Unfortunately, these late responses are nearly always dreadful. So, mostly, what that means is that I have more mental space to criticize them.

The fact is, if you have an excellent response, I'll pay attention to you no matter when you write me, but if you want to stand out, either be quick, or be slow.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:57 PM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thanks to everyone who weighed in on my question yesterday, both in comments and via email! It was extremely interesting for me to read your thoughts and the things you like about this blog. The overwhelming majority of readers seem to think that including more stories would be good, but mostly as illustrative examples, not so much in the erotica realm of things, and that feels much more like me, anyway, so that works out well.

In fact, a new reader emailed me recently to ask about my best and worst experiences actually meeting people, so I'll have to see if I can pick any of those out for your entertainment!

I started this blog as something of a whim, because I've been having such fun picking up men (and also not picking up men) on the internet for the last year or so, and on some level, I'd be enjoying writing here even if no one were reading it, but part of what has blossomed here has been a bit of a community of like-minded people, and it's really a blast to hear other people's stories and observations! I do, of course, hope that my advice might be helpful to the good guys out there on Craig's List and elsewhere, but at the very least, we all seem to be having a good time. I'll keep writing what I want to write, and you all can keep sharing your thoughts and/or questions when you're so inspired.

Posted by ClueChick at 9:05 AM in Administrativa | Permalink | Comments (0)

I think the problem is that I don't understand what a woman would want to get out of non-relationship sex with me. I'm a geek, not at all the alpha male, not at all the pretty boy or the jock or the executive. Women who have simple needs ("I want to be skillfully fucked by an attractive man") are amply served by the large line of more charming, better looking, better performing men who are looking for NSA sex. That's just the nature of the market and my place in it.

So please, help me understand why a woman would pass over the long line of more attractive men who want fuck buddies and choose something closer to home. What are they looking for? What can I give them? What assurances and enticements do they need?

What women want in non-relationship sexual experiences to meet men who like and respect them and want to have sex with them without judging them as sluts or treating them badly for being easy or whatever other ridiculous idea men carry around in their heads about loose women. We don't want to be lied to, we don't want to be pressured and we don't want some fucked up head trip. Basically, we want what guys want: fun sex without hang-ups. It's just that most women have different hang-ups than most men have.

What a woman would want to get out of sex with you is sex with someone she finds attractive and appealing. Lots of women go for geeks (trust me on this one) and are interested in more than a jock-y bod or big expense account. This is a key thing for you to get in your head: you, as you are, are some woman's fantasy, and fit into some women's daydreams. Be assured in that and then it's just a matter of hooking up with the right women!

That said, it's true that there are lots of hot men out there looking for NSA sex, and you may not shine in the one night stand realm (though don't sell yourself short -- you may be just the thing for some women!), but if what you're looking for is casual FWB or fuckbuddies or just an occasional lay with someone you don't have to lay the groundwork with every time, you're in a good position.

Only you know what you have to offer, and if that's compatible with keeping the distance you need. When I'm looking for FWB, I will pass on the superficially hot guy in order to find someone with whom I have more click. You can help yourself avoid that by finding women who are also clearly and explicitly not looking for anything serious.

As for assurances and enticements... I'd say, if you can talk to her like a real person, and offer her the kind of sexual adventure she's looking for, you're off to a good start!

Posted by ClueChick at 9:54 PM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (2)

In thinking of ways to expand my readership, one of my friends suggested that I should write the occasional review of my fun hookups -- a bit of erotica to spice things up. Although I'm not convinced of my ability to write porn that's not excruciatingly painful, I may give it a shot, but I also wanted to throw the question out to my readers, since, ostensibly, my mission here is to give advice, not share the details of my escapades.

So, what do you think? Can ClueChick exist as both an advice-blog and an occasional erotica-blog?

Posted by ClueChick at 7:46 AM in questions for the audience | Permalink | Comments (10)

Sapiophile writes, in a comment, "Avoid describing yourself as "hot", no matter whether you think you are or not. Instead, focus on those things that you DO believe are attractive about yourself."

This is an excellent point, and one that goes back to the series I had in December on saying what you mean. "Hot" is another meaningless term, right? What I think is hot (hello, bignose!) may be unattractive to others, and vice versa.

In truth, it's not fair of me to criticize someone for describing himself as hot and then turning out not to be, because I have probably been guilty of that, myself. That is to say, I have quite a high opinion of my appearance, but I know that I'm not everyone's type (after all, who is?) This is one of the reasons that I definitely advocate having a reasonably good (and, perhaps more importantly, accurate) photograph of yourself to send to the object of your flirtation at some point in the lead-up to meeting. I do meet the occasional guy without a photo first, but it's always nice to exchange pics first.

One of the things that has been most entertaining for me about what men have said about my photos when I meet them is, "You look just like your picture!" Apparently, this is a surprise. You all won't be shocked to hear that I find the idea of sending an unrealistic photograph self-defeating. Honesty, honesty, honesty, folks. And not just because it's the best policy, but also because, hey, it's easier! Why make your life harder for yourself, anyway?

At any rate, describing yourself as attractive or hot or what-have-you isn't useful at all, because you don't know what the person at the other end of your statement thinks is attractive. Do yourself a favor and smooth the process by being more precise in your self-description. It's good to focus on your strengths, and equally important to be realistic about yourself.

Posted by ClueChick at 6:49 PM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (0)

In yesterday's posts, I was rather focused on the lack of hotness of the fellow in question. I'm sure this caused no small amount of consternation amongst my more average readers (not that any of you is less than fabulous in your own right, I'm sure, but you know what I mean). Let me assure you of two things about hotness:

First, hotness is in the eye of the beholder. Every person has different things they like, and even when going purely on superficial indicators, there are a broad range of tastes out there. I, for example, have a strange and secret fetish for large noses. Not that I seek out large noses, but the faces I find most attractive tend to include large noses. I figure this is evolution's way of balancing out my small nose when (okay, if) I finally decide to settle down with a large-nosed mate and produce moderately-nosed little children.

Second, the more superficial your encounter with someone, the more superficial your hotness needs to be. This is good news for classically attractive yet shallow guys who are looking for casual sex, but bad news for the ones who want a long term relationship. Conversely, substantive but homely guys who are looking for casual sex may well have a harder time, but their significant relationships are likely to be much more successful.

Does this mean substantive but homely guys can't have casual sex? Not at all, but they do have more of a challenge. They just need to be prepared to set it up so their personality is a factor, which it certainly can be in a casual setup just as much as any other. No one's lying when they say the brain is the biggest sex organ, and that's true whether you're having a quick fuck or a lifetime setup. It may take a little more work, but it is totally, totally worth it.

Posted by ClueChick at 9:38 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (3)

Dear Not-Hot Guy:

Your emails were good, and you had a great attitude! I liked your confidence and your forward-yet-teasing approach to catching my attention. I liked that you flattered me but not obsequiously. Normally, I push hard to get a photo, but you told me you didn't have one, but that "[you're] very attractive and [I] won't be disappointed," and I thought, gosh, no one would be idiotic enough to lie about that!

When I arrived, you waved me over, and I thought, "But, wait, he said he's hot!" Okay, to be fair, you didn't say "hot". You said, "Very attractive." But, to be honest, you're really not. I'm sorry, and you'll notice that I didn't do anything rude like turn around and leave or cut our meeting drastically short.

Maybe you were thinking that this was a fine approach because you would win me over with your great personality. That might have worked if you were as dynamic in person as you were in email, but, no, you had that desperate air of being caught. I could tell; you knew you'd blown smoke and that now the fans were clearing the air. What a waste. You wasted my time, and you wasted your own time. Pfah!

I was disappointed. Very disappointed! Not only had I been looking forward to meeting a very attractive guy, but I had been looking forward to meeting someone who tells the truth and has a firm grasp on reality. So you can see why I was disappointed, right? Because either you think you're hot, or you know you're not and you lied about it. I hate that.

Now, I'm cranky. I hate that, too. I'm going to call one of my hot boys to console me.

Smooches,
ClueChick

Posted by ClueChick at 10:37 PM in snarky | Permalink | Comments (0)

Seriously, guys, stop lying

I swear, I thought this one was really clear. I obviously need to get the word out more effectively. But, listen. Lying in your initial emails with a woman is shooting yourself in the foot. Why?

Because the woman will find out.

Oh, sure, there are lies that, especially in a casual encounter, may well never come out. You can tell me you have a house in the Bahamas and I'll never know the difference. On the other hand, why the heck bother? The lies that are worth bothering with are the ones that will come out sooner or later, and probably sooner.

If you tell me you're hot, great, except, if you're not, and your goal is to meet face-to-face someday, then sooner or later the game will be up. Seriously. I know you guys aren't dumb. Okay, most of you aren't dumb. Maybe a little clueless sometimes, but, hey, that's why I love you! But, truly, I'm confounded on this one.

If a guy tells me he's hot, I'm going to expect him to be hot. And then if he's... well, if he's well below average, he's going to stack up even more poorly in comparison to the expectation he sets for himself in my eyes. Is there some hope here that I'll take him on his word and when I meet him, I'll reset my definition of hot?

For crying out loud, what a waste. Later today: letter to not-hot guy.

Posted by ClueChick at 9:35 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (2)

Okay, I'm going to try not to be too snarky, here, because this guy sent me an email but my response to him bounced, so instead, he gets featured here!

I am a 29 year old cute male and have received responses from girls when I post on women seeking men, but never on casual encounters. I work alot and sometimes do not get all my needs met. Am I doing something wrong on CE, are most of the posts fake, are women who post swamped with emails, or is there another site that might be more accomodating to my needs??

First off, you're right, you're very cute, and that's working in your favor. And you obviously are able to string together a coherent thought, so that's good, too. But...

I know there's a lot of cultural support for the idea that men have "needs" that women are supposed to meet. Let's toss that idea out the window, okay? If you're approaching your CE posts from the point of view of what you need from a woman, you're starting in a bad place. I, personally, never respond to posts that are focused around what the guy "needs". In fact, you'll notice I've made some snide remarks in past posts about this, and I certainly will again. You don't need anything from me, or from any other woman, and we don't need to meet those needs or help you out or anything like that.

Lots of posts on CE are fake. All women who post are swamped with emails, and if there is another site that's more accommodating to your needs, I haven't discovered it, yet, though if you're willing to pay for it, most cities provide a vast array of prostitutes who won't care if you think of them as meeting your needs.

Even in a casual encounter, most women don't want to feel like a piece of meat. When you set it up that way, it's not appealing, and it really, really comes through in how you (men, generally) communicate. Think of casual sex as something you're going to be doing with another person. An actual person who has wants and needs of her own. And then think about how to be appealing to a new person. As long as a woman in your eyes is simply a receptacle to discharge your orgasmic urges, you're going to have a hard time capturing their attention.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:12 AM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (1)

How do you handle STD discussion/questions?

This is one of my favorite questions, ever! I love it when guys are attentive and knowledgeable about the risks involved in sex, casual or otherwise, which is part of why I love it when a guy doesn't give me a hard time about meeting in a public place before getting together to fuck.

My approach to this is to mention condoms in my ad, for starters, so that right up front, everyone knows where my expectations are. I love it when guys respond including their own take on safer sex practices, and then I like to touch base on it in our initial emails leading up to a face-to-face meeting.

On those occasions that I respond to an ad, I don't always mention my safer sex practices right off the bat, but I do try to work them into the conversation early on.

Usually, guys have been pretty relaxed about talking about these things, though I've gotten some flak for asking questions someone thought were paranoid or excessive. Needless to say, if I get push-back on this, the conversation is over.

I will admit that I have had some hookups where I didn't discuss safer sex beforehand, and in those cases, I just assume we'll use whoever's safer sex rules are more stringent (usually mine). I'm floored, however, by how many men have showed up at my house with no condoms. Are they idiots? Are they simply assuming I'm using some other form of birth control? Do they think they're not just as much at risk of catching an STD as I am? By this point, if it's a guy I really want to fuck, I'll usually get out one of my condoms (which are better for giving head, anyway, because they're non-latex and thus, taste much better), but if I'm even remotely on the fence, I send him packing.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:32 AM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (1)

Okay, I'm at work, but I couldn't wait to share this gem:

BBW only. Today, tomorrow or saturday, you chose - 33

"No gays and lesi.. please"
I had posted this ad few days ago and got first few replies, but not a single write back after that. I guess I better give my full detail right now so we both can save some time. This is for BBW only. I would love if you are over 180 pounds, are short or anything but you have tits and pussy. This is a new experience for me and will probably be for you as well because I'm a good looking, 6'2", 33 years old, extremely good in bed guy looking to have sex with a BBW soon. I would love to try a big big girl on any weekdays or over the weekend. My father is white and mother is Indian. I was born here but raised in India for few years. I have fair color, I'm tall and good looking. Full sexual and oral satisfaction is guranteed. Imagine a fair colored and tall guy with charming look is standing in front of you. If you're open for this and can host, I can be there for you. Protection and discretion are the most important. I will lick you down there if you want me to. Nonsmoker prefered but not the most. Here are pics of my dick and myself. It means your email will not write anything such as " Can I see a pic of your dick?" later. Thanks and hope to see you soon.

I'm sure every self-respecting BBW out there is going to leap on this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fuck a good-looking guy. Especially one with such high standards that he'll only do a woman who has tits and a pussy!

Posted by ClueChick at 2:22 PM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (0)

What are your favorite places to meet?

I'm lazy. I like to meet in my neighborhood, or near somewhere that I'm going to be, anyway. Basically, if a guy makes it hard for me to get to where I'm going to meet him, or wants me to go way out of my way, I have to be desperately hot for him to make it happen.

There are a couple of cafes and coffee shops in walking distance to my house, and those are my preferred venues for meeting. Meeting for coffee is nice because it can be a long or short date, depending on how things go, and it's pretty inexpensive. On occasion, I'll meet someone for a meal, usually lunch, since that's both inexpensive and time-limited, as well as being less "loaded" than a dinner date. When the weather's nice, I'm often happy to meet somewhere outside, like a park, though it's nice to have a place to sit down, and having coffee or food gives me something to do with my hands.

I sometimes will meet someone at my house, though I don't necessarily recommend this; it's clearly the less-safe way of doing things, not to mention that if I decide I don't want to fuck him, it's more awkward and difficult to say no. When I do this, I make sure that a roommate or neighbor is home as a safety.

I never meet a guy for the first time at his place. There was a guy this fall who I was unusually hot for, but he was completely unwilling to meet anywhere else. Too bad.

All told, though, meeting at a friendly, low-key coffee shop near my house is far and away my preferred locale to meet someone the first time.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:09 AM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (1)

Remember that guy I mentioned in the IM conversation post a couple of days ago? He's back! He wants us to "just chat" even if we're not a good match.

Uhm. Yeah. Because I just love awkward and dull conversations with people who I'm never going to fuck or become friends with in even the most superficial way. Uh huh.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:33 PM in actual responses | Permalink | Comments (0)

How many responses do you get to a typical ad?

I'm pretty sure I've talked about this in passing in some other post, but I haven't made it the primary topic of a post before. So! How many responses does a woman get when she posts in the CE section of Craig's List?

A lot. Typically, I can count on about 100. I have, on one occasion, managed to write an ad that garnered only 25 or so responses, and they all sucked, which was appropriate, because the ad sucked. But most of my ads get between 90 and 150 responses, most of those in the first 24 hours. Once, on a whim, I posted the trolliest ad I could come up with while still being honest about who I am and what I'm looking for, and I got almost 300, and nearly all of them blew.

I find that I'm happiest with my responses when I write a long-ish ad with a lot of (usually nonexplicit) detail, which seems to signal that a) I'm for real and b) I care about guys taking the time to write good responses. In these cases, I've tended to get 80-120 responses, about half of them good (where good means that it's not obviously generic and the guy seems at least moderately clueful), and roughly 10-15 of them are promising enough for me to get my hopes up.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:48 AM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (0)