<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Dating-Strategies on A Geek&#39;s Life</title>
    <link>https://archive.rustgeek.me/tags/dating-strategies/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Dating-Strategies on A Geek&#39;s Life</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Sep 2011 18:48:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://archive.rustgeek.me/tags/dating-strategies/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>On being single...</title>
      <link>https://archive.rustgeek.me/2011/09/17/on-being-single/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 17 Sep 2011 18:48:42 +0000</pubDate>
       <guid isPermaLink="false">https://archive.rustgeek.me/2011/09/17/on-being-single/</guid> 
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&#34;http://liferebirth.blogspot.com/&#34;&gt;Rebirth&lt;/a&gt; says men are &lt;a href=&#34;http://liferebirth.blogspot.com/2011/09/dont-make-me.html&#34;&gt;never 100% single&lt;/a&gt;, and offers further clarification in a comment:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In my opinion, being single means free from any baggage, no causal dating or stringing along, emotionally available and willing to commit if its the right person&amp;hellip;but i find most guys have more than 2 women they are talking to at a time&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And I have been thinking. If I met someone (new) today, would I be emotionally available to commit, if it was the right person? Most probably not. Every time a picture of EJ flashes or her name comes up in a conversation, I realize I still haven&amp;rsquo;t forgotten, still haven&amp;rsquo;t let go. Am I &amp;rsquo;talking&amp;rsquo; to any other woman? No. There are the long term friends elC, TheB and ER who ostensibly might be options - but we&amp;rsquo;ve been stuck so much in the friends zone, I doubt anything can progress from that.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Quantity is underrated...</title>
      <link>https://archive.rustgeek.me/2011/09/14/quantity-is-underrated/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:58:39 +0000</pubDate>
       <guid isPermaLink="false">https://archive.rustgeek.me/2011/09/14/quantity-is-underrated/</guid> 
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Conventional wisdom suggests that quality trumps quantity. I imagine it is an MO that ‘makes sense’: identify a few high value targets, focus the scare resource of time and energy on them and (hopefully) maximize the potential reward.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&#34;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisa_May_Alcott&#34;&gt;Louisa May Alcott&lt;/a&gt; probably spoke for everyone when she had Amy say in &lt;a href=&#34;http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110367/quotes&#34;&gt;&amp;lsquo;Little Women&amp;rsquo;&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;You don&amp;rsquo;t need scores of suitors. You need only one&amp;hellip; if he&amp;rsquo;s the right one&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The only snag in that little argument is that this is based on the implicit assumption that one knows in quite precise terms what/who the One is; and that this definition is pretty much static. In real life, I suspect that the who/ what is continuously evolving, such that truly knowing what that entails is an iterative process. One then, must of necessity, date in quantity to gain a better understanding of the &amp;lsquo;market&amp;rsquo;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
