None of my DNA matches have ever contacted me

[Spelk]

Over the ten + years since I did DNA tests I can only recall one contact from a stranger. That was a 24cM match with nothing else to link us so I suggested to him that it was likely just MyHeritage piling up many little bits of cM.
It may be that you like me have a fairly complete tree online so when people do see a match they can look at the linked tree and see how they connected and so see no need to make contact. When I look at my matches - if I can work out how they connect I will add the person to my tree with a note added to their name to flag up the DNA but rarely try to contact them. If I cannot work out the connection or spot an issue with their tree I might try to contact them or add a Comment to a parson on their tree but that rarely gets any response.
I'd guess that over 90% of people who take DNA tests have virtually no long term interest in their family history. And of the others 90% loose interest after 6 months and get on with the real world.

Added - As Drifter has said it may be that people are put off making contact if you do not give your real name.

And I have remembered some cousins passed on a contact they had had from a man in Australia who was a DNA match who had contacted them. He was adapted and looking to identify his parents. I gave him some details of cousins who had migrated to Australia some decades back who were likely his family but never heard from him again.

[Zaphod99]

Ptdrifter, yes, I think a photograph is helpful, as well as text in your profile saying that you are willing to help. A stranger is just a cousin that you haven't met yet!

Spelk, I know your 90% figures were hypothetical, but 17,000 multiplied by 0.9 and again multiplied by 0.9, still means that there are 3,000 people who might just be interested.

Zaph

[Spelk]

I have added to my first message.
Zaph your arithmetic is wrong. 17,000 x 0.1 x 0.1 is 170.

[Zaphod99]

Hmm.  I agree with your multiplications by 0.1, but I'm puzzled why my multiplications by 0.9 and 0.9 come up with a different answer.  A paradox, a paradox!   Mine should be the total number of people out of my 17,000 matches who are unlikely to contact me. 

In retrospect I think I probably needed some brackets. 90% of 17,000 is 15,300, which are the first batch who wouldn't respond, and so I should then be looking at 90% of the difference between 17,000 and 15,300, i.e. 1,700.

I haven't had lunch yet...

Pseudo names have never worried me. I'd never really given it a thought, although it does sometimes seem a little bit odd starting an email 'Dear ', followed by some bizarre nickname.

Zaph

[sandiep]

now you mention it I dont recall anyone contacting me, not everyone I have contacted answers, I  did wonder if with my tree I have mixed mine and hubbies and its under my maiden name although I do get more answers from his side than mine. so many people dont make trees or if they do put some names they only put births and of course ancestry put them as living so no names to view. Still have made a few connections.

[Glen in Tinsel Kni]

It's rare for someone to initiate contact with me though I have had some success when I have started the ball rolling. The main issue is many seem to think DNA is a one click answer to everything and requires no knowledge or understanding, that and the often held belief that if the DNA contradicts the family story then it's simply wrong. My most extreme example is someone denying a link to a match they share over 800cM with because 'granny was a virgin until her wedding night'. 

[Zaphod99]

Glen, yes contacting people myself and getting replies is no problem. Admittedly sometimes it can be a year or two before they realise they've got a message. I just really can't believe that out of 17,000 matches not a single one has chosen to contact me. I know lots of them are below 10 or 20 centimorgans, but there are many above 20 and it just surprises me why they've never bothered contacting me. I accept that some people aren't interested and had just been given DNA tests as presents.  And there must be many people that get their results and are just bewildered by them as it is not an easy interest to attack.

Zaph

[Josephine]

I'd guess that over 90% of people who take DNA tests have virtually no long term interest in their family history. And of the others 90% loose interest after 6 months and get on with the real world.

I think this is the case. Keeners like us are still a tiny minority.

I've been contacted twice. The first time was by a man who shares a small amount of DNA and is related to me on my father's side through common ancestors in the 1700s. (I couldn't figure out who the common ancestors were because there isn't enough information in the parish records.)

Even though we're such distant matches on my father's side, this man has hoovered up every bit of data he can find in online trees pertaining to my mother's side, including photos of my mother's parents. He seemed nice enough but weirded me out. I'd rather he spend his time and energy trying to figure out the earlier family lines that we do have in common but, hey, that's just me.

The second time I was contacted was by a descendant of my grandmother's sister. He asked how we were related. When I told him who I am and that we're related through that line, and not through his paternal line, he said thanks and I never heard from him again. I got the impression that he's primarily interested in his paternal line.

I've sent messages to several people and have only had one response. I had been in touch with this woman at least 15 years earlier (through email) because we're both descendants of a family with an unusual surname that settled in a particular part of Canada and the US. We didn't have any paper evidence that our two lines were related but I shared everything I had with her because she was doing an informal one-name study.

When I saw that my brother and I did, in fact, share some DNA with this woman, I looked at her tree, which was now online. I made note of her earliest ancestor by that name (in the US) and tried to find something that would connect him to my earliest ancestor by that name (in Canada), but no luck. I messaged her via Ancestry and told her that we were related, which I would think would be great news for someone who has been so interested in researching that family.

She responded that she wasn't going to rely on DNA results until she had a better grasp of the various "pedigrees" in question. She said she'd look into it when she could. That was three years ago. (This isn't a criticism of this woman. She's obviously busy doing other things that are more important to her.)

Oh, and the next time I tried to look at her tree, I discovered that she'd set it to 'private.'

[Zaphod99]

Josephine, I'm getting off topic from my original article, but I have had success by following up an email to a match, even a year or two later, as sometimes people seem to miss the message altogether, and sometimes they're just busy with other life activities at the wrong time. I do recommend sending subsequent messages, and of course never being critical that you didn't get an earlier reply.

I never understand people making their tree private. I know they get copied, but why does that matter?  If you are confident your research is accurate, then it gets more credence as more people copy it.

Zaph