General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAshley Madison a bigger scam than people realized. Only 0.075% of female users verifiably real.
It's not news that Ashley Madison was an overwhelmingly male site, or that AM placed fake female profiles on the site, but new numbers released in a Gizmodo article yesterday (http://gizmodo.com/almost-none-of-the-women-in-the-ashley-madison-database-1725558944) shows how much of an outright scam the site may have been. The media last week revealed that most of the women were fake, and it was widely reported that only 5.5 million of the sites 31 million users were women, but this new analysis reveals that the real numbers may have only been a tiny fraction of that. A VERY tiny fraction.
The new analysis shows:
Vast numbers of the "real" female accounts were actually generated from AM IP addresses or had AM email addresses. Vast numbers of "real" accounts have birthdates and other data that falls outside the range of statistical probability (suggesting that it was randomly generated by a bot).
But most importantly, for a site designed to "connect" people, there were remarkably few "connections" with actual women. Only 2409 women had ever engaged in chat on the site. Only 1,492 women had ever accessed the Check Messages screen. Only 9,700 women had ever clicked the button to respond to messages sent to them. Most tellingly, only 12,108 women had ever gone through the paid account shutdown process.
That means, of the purported "5.5 million" women who were using the site, only 26,209 had ever actually used any of the sites primary features. Only 26,209 were actually active users, and even THAT number presumes that there's no overlap between the people using the various features.
All of this simply confirms what many people have suspected all along. Ashley Madison was a very elaborate, very deliberate scam designed to extract money from stupid men. The numbers show that the average male user spent hundreds of dollars on the site before terminating the account, and that virtually none of them ever actually got laid as a result.
Syzygy321
(583 posts)That we don't cheat?
That though we do cheat, it's not likely we will risk getting naked with a strange Internet guy?
That we are too smart to give our info to a website that could bite us in the butt someday?
That we are all logging on a different site with a more manly name like "Trevor Michael"?
JI7
(89,252 posts)I always wondered why they don't just go to a bar or something .
There are men and women who have no problem with just one time sex without anything more.
I can maybe understand if it's a small town and everyone knows everyone. But places like dc will have a lot of out of town people also.
TacoD
(581 posts)Xithras
(16,191 posts)1) This has been studied before, and women tend to cheat with men they already know. Statistically a woman is most likely to cheat with a coworker or a friend of her husbands. Former boyfriends, neighbors, and "domestic help" follow those two on the list.
2) If a woman wants to cheat and doesn't want to do it with someone from #1, they don't need to go troll the Internet to find someone. Nearly any woman can walk into any bar and say the words "I want to sleep with someone tonight" and find someone willing to sleep with her. Very few men can do that, which is why they flock to sites that promise them improved odds.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Er...um...12k...no wait...2,409 women.
So can they get sued for false advertisement?
JI7
(89,252 posts)So it's easy money for the site.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Never thought about it like that! What a perfect scam!
Xithras
(16,191 posts)AM is the perfect scam. It's a criminal enterprise that's committing outright fraud on victims who can't fight back without subjecting themselves to additional personal harm. It's like being a mugger who only targets pickpockets. What are they gonna do, call the police?
mike_c
(36,281 posts)ROFL indeed.