I think people would still try their luck with more desirable prospects and end up getting frustrated.
Another idea is having a moderator of sorts. The moderator would pick from the "applicants" that make it through to the prospect, and mean that only high-effort options are seen. Removes "hey" and abusive messages from the pool.
Maybe applicants pay a $5 fee which is refunded if they are not picked as one of a handful of dates.
I like that, and it could be marketified/gamified too. People could put themselves forward as potential match-makers, i.e. moderators who screen introductory messages, and they can stake a certain number of points on whether they think the recipient will like the message. (They could also review abuse reports after the fact, including ghosting).
Over time, certain match-makers with a track record for finding good matches would be highly valued, and they could be given a free premium membership (giftable to friends) to reward them. I suppose the downside is that people who do a bad job at screening messages would end up having to pay more as a consequence, and the community might end up relying on a minority of users to do all this extra work.
> So you basically propose a Stack Overflow for dating?
If you put it like that, it sounds like a great idea!
> Why not let the community vote who has sex with who?
Isn't that how most societies have effectively been run for thousands of years? I'm not saying it's the best we can do, but it in terms of societal outcomes it can't be much worse than the current dating scene.
Another idea is having a moderator of sorts. The moderator would pick from the "applicants" that make it through to the prospect, and mean that only high-effort options are seen. Removes "hey" and abusive messages from the pool.
Maybe applicants pay a $5 fee which is refunded if they are not picked as one of a handful of dates.