Eric Cord
My feedback
5 results found
-
2,395 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment -
1,545 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment I agree that some sort of filter should be provided without cost. Afterall, when Grindr started, it was a gay male seeks gay male app. No disrespect intended towards the trans community, those who are looking to date trans tend not to be looking for non-trans individuals. This tends to be true of those who are not seeking date trans, they tend solely seek trans. Being that the case, why not either allow a filter (those who choose to seek trans be only available to be seen by trans, as well as trans only available to be seen by those who are seeking trans).
I, speaking for myself alone and can't speak of others experiences, am not one who seeks trans individuals nor do I want to be contacted by trans (un-politically correct as that is, it a truth). Being on a dating/connection app/site is already a bit stressful, the hit and miss of contacting someone one might find attractive and wanting to get to know. This current situation, having to politely reject an individual due to something the App/Site could easily prevent by applying either a filter or category. Yet, Grindr users are still subjected to navigating an app which scrutinizes photos (no allowance of collages composed with one's actual physical appearance), yet allows Landscapes, objects such as vehicles, animals, cartoon. The app is plagued with AI/Adbots who try to solicit joining other sites, to purchase "steam card", or forward via CashApp. I guess, it's the price we pay.Free FILTER please.
-
8 votes
-
9 votes
-
19 votes
Charlie T., I respect your stance and you are correct about the changes in the LBGTQ community and being accepted. Grindr is an app following a Line of other apps, built upon the shoulders of gay men. Before it, Manhunt.net reigned until making a decision in their format which led to its decline. The website which allowed the chat format to include a large number of individuals to chat in regional and distinct fragmented categories which Manhunt and Romeo ( formerly PlanetRomeo ) gathered up most of its members was Gay.com. Gay.com faded away before telephone apps rose to popularity, but it was a cool place to chat (even better when implemented cams into chatrooms) plus it had a public name, partnered with real brick & mortar bars/clubs as well as companies like Absolut, Instinct Magazine, even Amazon. Even AOL and Chat IBQ, before Gay.com, allowed chat and yet also separated LBGTQ into individual groups/rooms to allow individuals to actually communicate with the individuals which they wanted to communicate.
You say to just accept the influx as being inclusive, to accept the unwanted chats, to be the unwanted chatter. The point I am making is, allowing a free filter, or an option not to be viewed will seem to be discrimination/segregation.Truth is, it is exactly that. Yet, the same thing some of us are pushing for in regards to members we see on Grindr’s grid can be said as to why we are on Grindr, rather than Tinder. And if I were on Tinder, I should mention, Gay men would seem to the intruder on an app/site.
How’s wanting the filter/opt out.function really any different than choosing to enter a forum that was started with the intention for gay and bi men to meet gay and bi men. Just allowing those who came to Grindrr for its initial purpose to enjoy the app without intrusion.
I am aware, Grindr will not impliment something beneficial to its users, just as it allows profiles to be create with no photos and/or lacking simple BASIc information regarding the member, which is actually a contributing factor to the large number of scammers, AI/AdBots, and criminal elements to prey on members.