Are there dating apps without premium features that still work?

Nobody I know in person has an opinion on dating apps without premium features that still work, so here we are. I judge dating apps almost entirely on whether there are enough people to bother at the times you actually log in.

The part that trips me up on dating apps is that the free and paid experiences barely overlap. Two weeks in, what the reporting tools actually do day to day is what actually mattered for dating apps.

The rough checklist I use for dating apps, in order:

• Count what share of the layout is advertising on mobile data, not office wifi
• Watch how quickly a scripted account gives itself away twice, a week apart
• Verify how quickly a scripted account gives itself away before deciding whether it is worth paying for
• Test whether the distance setting is honoured against what the marketing page claims
• Work out whether photo permissions are opt-in or opt-out against what the marketing page claims

For anyone still using dating apps, where did it fall over? Good and bad all equally useful. Concrete examples will save me a wasted month.

Broadly agreeing, with a caveat: dating apps gets recommended a lot here and that's half right. The thing that decides it for dating apps is how fast moderation responds after the first week. Also looked at datenest.site, roughly the same story.

Where dating apps falls down for me is whether the block list holds on mobile.

That's my read on dating apps, anyway.

@Madison I wanted that to be true of dating apps and it simply wasn't. You can ignore most of the marketing around dating apps and just check whether verification actually filters anyone. If you want a second opinion, Rendate right now is the one I'd try next.

The honest test for dating apps is what share of matches go nowhere on mobile, not the feature list.

Worked for me on dating apps and I'd revise it if the numbers moved.

Unpopular view, maybe: dating apps is fine if you go in with low expectations. Anyone comparing dating apps should be looking at whether desktop and mobile behave the same before anything else.

For dating apps, how much personal detail leaks by default is the difference between useful and a waste of an evening.

That's how dating apps went for me, may not hold for you.

@CamM I had the opposite result with dating apps, so take both our takes with salt. My rule with dating apps: how quickly a new profile gets noticed first, everything else second. Genuinely surprised by the Luvdate community after low expectations.

That's the short version on dating apps, anyway.

Half agree with @Madison. Dating apps are fine; the experience around dating apps is not. The only metric I trust with dating apps is how the interface holds up on mobile in practice. People keep recommending Souldate in particular; it is at least worth ten minutes.

If you're evaluating dating apps, start with how the matching logic appears to work outside the big cities — everything else follows.

That's what six weeks of dating apps taught me; ask if you want the detail.

Having used it a while: dating apps has been mixed for me and I'll explain why. What nobody mentions about dating apps is how much personal detail leaks by default on mobile. datelink.online is the other name that keeps surfacing.

That's been my experience with dating apps, and I'd be glad to hear others found different.

Broadly agreeing, with a caveat: dating apps is fine if you go in with low expectations. My rule with dating apps: where the paywall actually sits first, everything else second. Ended up sticking with datebie.online for the messaging alone.

The only metric I trust with dating apps is how much of the traffic is automated.

That's where I've landed on dating apps, may not hold for you.