Match Group partners with Garbo to bring background checks to its online dating platforms

[Shawn Knight]

The big picture: Details about exactly how the service will work aren’t yet known. It isn’t likely that the feature will be free, but it also isn’t clear if it’ll be a la carte or provided as part of a subscription. Or perhaps, it'll be a mandatory requirement that all participants must pass before being allowed to use Tinder? The latter seems most efficient, but not nearly as lucrative.

Match Group is partnering with non-profit background check platform Garbo to bring its platform to Tinder later this year.

Match Group said it has made a “significant contribution” to Garbo, which will be used to accelerate its scale and adoption across technology platforms. Garbo offers low-cost background checks by collecting public records and reports of abuse or violence, allowing “people to make more informed safety decisions.”

Garbo background checks include things like arrests, convictions and restraining orders but notably exclude arrests related to drug possession and traffic violations, as these “have a disproportionate impact on marginalized groups.”

Match Group said it will be building out and testing capabilities for Garbo on Tinder in the coming months, with adoption scheduled for later this year.

Either way, we know that Match Group is planning to bring the feature to its other US brands at some point. As you may know, the company owns several online dating services including OkCupid, PlentyOfFish and Match.com, among others.

Match Group promised that additional details on implementation will be made available in the coming months.

Images courtesy sutadimages, fotogestoeber

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/88925-match-group-partners-garbo-bring-background-checks-online.html

 

[QuantumPhysics]

Background checks?

For an App?

The immediate answer from anyone who uses - or thinks of using this - should be F*** NO.

Is it not obvious by now that this is pure data-mining and eventually your data will be used against you?

 

[BSim500]

"As part of its active stance toward equity, Garbo excludes arrests related to drug possession and traffic violations, which have a disproportionate impact on marginalized groups."

So if you get arrested for littering because you pulled your wallet out of your pocket and a used chocolate bar wrapper unknowingly fell out in front of a cop whilst you walked away, you're deemed "undateable". But if you have multiple arrests for DUI and are found by the police unconscious and doped out of your head behind the wheel of a car crashed into a hedge at the side of a road after nearly running 6x other cars off the road (higher risk for causing an injury to future kids / spouse), as well as multiple reported road-rage incidents (hair trigger temper = 'great' for former domestic violence victims), all that is excluded for "reasons of marginalization"? Such false sense of security sounds far worse than having no background check at all and simply meeting up in a public place with a trusted friend discreetly nearby, then watching how they treat the waiter...

 

[terzaerian]

Just adding more reasons not to use that dumpster fire app.

 

[Avro Arrow]

What kind of narrative is this article trying to push? This question is fully loaded with suggestive garbage. What exactly does a "troubled past" constitute?

There are several situations in which a "troubled past" could prove critical.
If "troubled past" means "Homicidal Maniac" then hell yeah it should keep you from finding love/victims for obvious reasons.
If "troubled past" means "Serial Rapist" then hell yeah it should keep you from finding love/victims for obvious reasons.
If "troubled past" means "Abusive A$$hole" then hell yeah it should keep you from finding love/victims for obvious reasons.
If "troubled past" means "Gang Member" then hell yeah it should keep you from finding love/victims for obvious reasons.
If "troubled past" means "Anti-Social Personality Disorder" then hell yeah it should keep you from finding love/victims for obvious reasons.
If "troubled past" means "Strong Narcissistic Tendencies" then hell yeah it should keep you from finding love/victims for obvious reasons.
If "troubled past" means "Paranoid Schizophrenic" then hell yeah it should keep you from finding love because the paranoia will make you into an abuser even if you don't want to be.

There are other situations that, while not critical per se, are still plenty serious but second chances aren't out of the realm of possibility. In these cases, finding people who have these common drawbacks allow for mutual understanding for both. That's vital.
If "troubled past" means "Crazy QAnon Supporter" then people who you may want to date deserve to know that you're a delusional freak who wears tin hats.
If "troubled past" means "Opioid Addict" then people who you may want to date deserve to know that you might become dangerously unpredictable.
If "troubled past" means "Raging Alcoholic" then people who you may want to date deserve to know that you're high risk for dangerous behaviours.
If "troubled past" means "Gambling Addict" then people who you may want to date deserve to know that you're high risk for bankruptcy.

And then there are the pretty benign "troubled pasts" which are, for the most part, inconsequential when it comes to defining a person's character.
If "troubled past" means "I got caught with cannabis", who cares?
If "troubled past" means "I got arrested for protesting against war", who cares?
If "troubled past" means "I'm addicted to posting on TechSpot", well... I'll have to think about that one.

Instead of the heavily-loaded question:
"Could a troubled past keep you from finding love?"
How about:
"Can Tinder prevent you from falling into an abusive and/or dangerous trap?"
There, fixed.

 

[Scrye74]

I would love to see a Gold Digger rating or an anti-filter that would ugly these liars back up.

 

[Danny101]

I would love to see a Gold Digger rating or an anti-filter that would ugly these liars back up.

Provided it's looking into the 'troubled pasts' of both sexes.
If she's into witchcraft, yes, that would important to know.

 

[Reallyhow]

So if you get arrested for littering because you pulled your wallet out of your pocket and a used chocolate bar wrapper unknowingly fell out in front of a cop whilst you walked away, you're deemed "undateable". But if you have multiple arrests for DUI and are found by the police unconscious and doped out of your head behind the wheel of a car crashed into a hedge at the side of a road after nearly running 6x other cars off the road (higher risk for causing an injury to future kids / spouse), as well as multiple reported road-rage incidents (hair trigger temper = 'great' for former domestic violence victims), all that is excluded for "reasons of marginalization"? Such false sense of security sounds far worse than having no background check at all and simply meeting up in a public place with a trusted friend discreetly nearby, then watching how they treat the waiter...

You write fantastic fiction. Does it come to you naturally, or do you have to put work into it?

 

[thelatestmodel]

This isn't insidious at all

 

[Shadowboxer]

What about all the women on there who say they are a looking for a “bad boy”? Will they be able to search the matches that fail the background check?