| Author | Post |
|---|
ronin1
Administrator
| Joined: | Saturday January 21st, 2006 |
| Location: | S.F. Bay Area, California USA |
| Posts: | 622 |
| Visits: | 7 | | Currently: | married |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sunday March 19th, 2006 09:01 pm |
|
Benefits of Correspondence Through an Agency…
Agencies have many flavors. How they handle their e-mail services is, IMO, irrelevant to ones chances. However, perhaps some generalizations can be made about how far away the RW lives from the agency office (assuming a foreign office exists and that you are expecting to meet her at or near the agency office).
RW are very pragmatic and will without thinking assign the degree of risk in loss involved with meeting a WM. On one hand, she will weigh the time, effort and expense that she expects to incur in visiting said WM. On the other hand, she will weigh the likelihood that there can be a match, with all the benefits that may entail. Obviously, the further the RW has to travel to meet any given WM, all the three risk factors go up in most cases.
To put this in perspective we will talk about time. Time is time...well not really. That one hour drive to work in congested traffic don't offset being 20 minute late. In this regard RW are like most people in that time is not linear. Time is an even more important commodity to RW since they have very precious little of it. However if the RW lives far from the agency, she will most often incorporate this extra time into her cost of keeping this option open to her. If a RW lives very far, be cognizant of this and give her extra leeway and kudos.
Money is another important commodity to RW since they have very precious little of it as well. If a RW lives far from the agency, as the distance increases, the cost of transportation increases at a decreasing rate. Keep in mind that like ‘time’ RW have a finite limits of loss. RW make perhaps up to 50% less income compared to their male counterparts in Russia. Putting all this together, RW are very sensitive to the costs of this endeavor.
Effort is somewhat of an intangible and it is subjective to the views of each RW. Still effort plays an important role in the weighing of risks. You can look at effort as the expenditure of energy of the RW. Perhaps she has to cross a country border or make multiple transport connections. Some RW value their effort more than most such that even a paltry effort is big in their eyes.
So now, what does this all mean? RW that live far away will often have a lot of risk placed on the scales. To offset this, one must provide ample evidence that a good match is possible on the other end of the scale. RW may want some reasonable assurances that her time and effort will not go to waste. This is where correspondence comes in. It can provide the prescreening that is necessary for both parties to have reasonable assurances that at least a match is possible on some very cursory criteria. Another way to reduce the risk is to defray her transport expenses; however this is not wise in most cases, IMO. It would be more preferred to travel to her city or town.
On the other end are the RW that live within a bus ride way of the agency. For them, the risks are extremely low. No money expense to speak of. Little effort and time are needed. These RW may not require a lot of effort in e-mails and the like. As a matter-of–fact they are often net beneficiaries if you take them out to lunch or to an attraction. Some or many will not write at all, but will be available for you to date and may pack most of your schedule. They are relatively easy to get a date with, however since they will divulge little before the first date, the first meeting is perhaps a little better than a blind date. In such meeting, one must be able to perform well on a face-to-face encounter. Also, being able to size up the RW so you don’t end up wasting your time is to your advantage. At times, perhaps if there is an extreme mis-match in personalities or interests, it is not outside the realm of possibility to end to meeting early so as not to waste your time and hers.
To put things in a nutshell, the ends of the scales are biased as usual. On one end you have the far-away RW. On the surface she looks like a good bet since there will be a decent history of e-mails to help make the initial link. The down side is maybe all is for naught if you both don’t have that spark when you make the face-to-face encounter. Perhaps in other words, one can only do so much surveying, but eventually one will have to sweat with shovel to be proven right.
On the other end is the nearby RW. They are as F. Gumps said, “Like a box of chocolates…” It is more of a gamble on the front end; however you have the opportunity to make plenty of face-to-face greet and meets to see if a fire can be kindled. IMO, regardless of how many e-mails you may write, the two-way chemistry has to be there or the relationship will not be a lasting one.
So gentlemen, pick your poison(s). There is no clear definitive answer. If a generalization can be made, it maybe for those that are talented in the language. Perhaps correspondence will give one an edge a drawing those RW that are farther away from the agency office. If one is not endowed with the gift of writing, perhaps the “bird in the hand” may yield better results.
RoninLast edited on Saturday March 15th, 2008 06:29 pm by ronin1
|
Current time is 01:54 pm | |
|
|
|