Is not planning and foreseeing expecting something?

(Also - ability or inability?)

Magician's assistant. (You can pull a cat out of a bunny out of a hat!)

Gregarious.

If that's the case for more people on dating sites, then perhaps I should change the question to, "Why join a dating site in the first place?" Why not spend the time and energy searching in the real world?
Several profiles I've seen on various sites say that she's tired of looking in the real world, or that the results there were just as disappointing. I don't see why an online site would be considered any worse - it's generally cheaper than going out to meet people in real life, going on lots of first/blind dates and spending the money (as opposed to spending the money after you know something about the person).
Several others say that she just doesn't have the time to look for love in the real world. Is that a reason why lots of people don't stick to the dating sites for longer? They think they're wasting too much time, or not getting enough return-on-investment?

What is the alternative to having expectations? Wandering through life just taking whatever comes at you?

This is a serious symptom which I have seen on many dating sites: people play along for a few days, a week, or a month, but then they give up on the whole process and never sign in again.
How do people expect to get anywhere after so short a time, without checking in at least once a month? You've got to have some stick-to-it-ivness to pursue a relationship, and it's not a good sign if you can't display the powerful dedication and commitment it takes to log on to a website once a month. Not only does it reduce their own chances, but it reduces the chances ot everybody who likes them, but will never get in touch with them because they can't be bothered to sign in again.

What makes people give up so quickly?

Bored as all snax!

How about that Natus Vicere, eh? Eh? Good times...

I SHOULD go to a gym... but it's not one of those things I'm prepared to subscribe to (as in, with money). I do some exercises at home, and that seems to be doing well enough to work off all the salt, fat, and sugar I eat. I think it's more important to do SOMETHING, either at home or at a gym, than nothing at all. And at-home is cheaper.

And here this whole time I thought I counted as "old", when I'm really just not young enough to attract older ladies, and not old enough to attract the younger ones. >.<

I'd eat that.

What? I totally meant the pretzel.

Kender?

If not, then kookaburra.

Words that are over-used don't bother me nearly as much as words which are misused.

I don't see the shame if you are a single prominent person (though things get VERY sticky if you're married or have a long-standing relationship) who has their picture on a dating site. Like everything else, it depends on what standards you have, and how careful you are in selecting your mate (for example, making sure they're not just marrying you for your fame, money, or social status).
And frankly, I wouldn't accept that as an excuse if I ever heard it. If you're too famous to merely show me your picture, then I'm too poor/unknown/low-class to date you.

Sex is a significant part in the compatibility of a romantic relationship. It should come around naturally sooner or later, depending on how both parties feel about it. If you're not planning on having sex ever, marriage isn't going to help you with that - and isn't it also in Genesis that "Man shall inherit the earth"? Hard to do unless sex and offspring enter the picture somewhere.
On the other hand, if sex is the foundation of the relationship, the one thing that really brings two people together... it's a really shakey foundation, and has a built-in expiration date: the point when one party ceases to find the other party attractive. Unfortunately, this is not just a problem for people who have sex but aren't married, for infidelity and divorce are very common. I really don't think marriage IS or SHOULD BE the deciding factor about sex. People can love one another whether they are married or not; likewise, marriage itself doesn't stop people from having sex with anybody. That's down to the personality, sense of loyalty, and commitment of the married couple.

And if you want another little historical lesson, for centuries a man and woman were not considered to be married unless they had consummated it - i.e., had sex, preferably getting the woman pregnant. You could anull the marriage if you two hadn't had sex, and there were some funny ecclesiastical cases where one party claimed they had had sex, while the other party claimed they hadn't.

Real estate agent.

Don't follow my example TOO closely - I only garnered this bit of wisdom after being played with for more than a year.

"When in doubt, use your teeth."

My cutoff for a serious relationship is three dates (very approximately three weeks). In that period of time, it is okay to date multiple people, because you can't know someone well enough to make an informed, committed decision until at least that far in. (And this is no way prevents either party from canceling things later.)
After the third date, though, assuming all parties have been honest enough, you should be able to decide which person you like best. If you can't decide, then you either need to leave both (all) relationships and find someone new, or make a choice and risk the commitment for a little while.

Personally, I'm not a very competitive man - I wouldn't "compete" for a woman within those first three dates. I would offer what I have, and promote myself, but I'm not going to bother playing a round of pool, or get in an arm-wrestling contest, or fight to the death for her to see if I can win her affection. If she can't decide between me and another man, then she obviously hasn't chosen me, so I'll go ahead and make the choice for her. After the third date, though, when both parties should be committed, I will defend my date and her honor, but after that point "competing" for her shouldn't be necessary.

In fairness, Ms. navygirl, you DO have a BEAUTIFUL chassis. ;)

... awful hangovernail? Unless, of course, they had...