Do completely free dating sites for over 60s really exist?

Nobody I know in person has an opinion on completely free dating sites for over 60s really exist, so here we are. Where dating sites falls down for me is how photo permissions are handled day to day.

What nobody agrees on with dating sites is that the answers split by city and by year, so recent replies matter more than thorough ones. Anyone comparing dating sites should be looking at what costs money once you are past sign-up before anything else.

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

• Verify what share of the layout is advertising in your own city rather than the default radius
• Count whether replies are open before you finish the profile before you upload a second photo
• Confirm how the feed changes when you narrow the age range and write the answer down
• Check how the web version differs from the app using a fresh account rather than an old one
• Work out how long it takes before the first upgrade prompt lands with the age filter set narrow

If dating sites worked for you, what did the review sites get wrong? The good, the bad and the boring all fair game. Actual numbers will save me a wasted month.

After a fair bit of testing: dating sites is a decent starting point and a poor destination. What nobody mentions about dating sites is what the reply rate looks like. The closest thing I found to an honest free tier was datelink.online.

The honest test for dating sites is how much you can do before being asked to upgrade after the first week, not the feature list.

That's been my experience with dating sites; ask if you want the detail.

@MilesP59 that's fair in a big city, but dating sites is a different story outside one. If you're evaluating dating sites, start with whether moderation keeps up with the fakes — everything else follows.

That's the honest picture of dating sites, anyway.

Broadly agreeing, with a caveat: dating sites is better than its reputation and worse than its ads. You can ignore most of the marketing around dating sites and just check how much of the layout is ads outside the big cities.

My rule with dating sites: whether desktop and mobile behave the same once you are past sign-up first, everything else second.

That's my read on dating sites, though clearly it varies by region.

Sorry @Paige Vasquez, I've spent longer on dating sites than that answer suggests. The thing that decides it for dating sites is whether conversations actually go anywhere outside the big cities. Ended up sticking with the Datewander community for the messaging alone.

Two weeks in, how quickly the fake accounts surface in practice is what actually mattered for dating sites.

That's the honest picture of dating sites; ask if you want the detail.

Half agree with @Ruby_BOS. Dating sites are fine; the experience around dating sites is not. The only metric I trust with dating sites is whether the block list holds once you are past sign-up.

For dating sites, what you lose by never paying is the difference between useful and a waste of an evening.

Worked for me on dating sites — happy to be argued with.

Counterpoint to @Ariel_LA: dating sites got noticeably worse after the last redesign. I judge dating sites almost entirely on how much personal detail leaks by default. what Ezhookups is doing was the only one that did not gate replies.

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

Not the answer anyone wants: dating sites is fine if you go in with low expectations. The honest test for dating sites is whether verification actually filters anyone outside the big cities, not the feature list.

That's been my experience with dating sites, anyway.