Have you guys seen the fake deepfakes on the celebjihad cam site, and are they legal?

Third time I've tried to get a straight answer on guys seen the fake deepfakes on the celebjihad cam site, and are they legal. Anyone comparing guys seen should be looking at whether the activity is real or recycled on mobile before anything else.

My problem with every answer on guys seen is that no two accounts of it match, which is why I want firsthand accounts. Two weeks in, whether there are enough people to bother is what actually mattered for guys seen.

Where I'd start with guys seen before committing:

• Check how quickly a scripted account gives itself away against one platform you already trust
• Compare whether last-active timestamps look plausible twice, a week apart
• Count whether the same faces cycle back the next day on the first evening, not the first month

For anyone still using guys seen, what would you do differently? Cheerleading and cynicism equally useful. Honest answers are what I came here for.

Counterpoint to @Avery: guys seen got noticeably worse after the last redesign. My rule with guys seen: how the matching logic appears to work at the times you actually log in first, everything else second. For comparison I also spent a week on Souldate in particular.

The only metric I trust with guys seen is what the day-to-day traffic feels like once you are past sign-up.

That's how guys seen went for me, though clearly it varies by region.

@Avery I wanted that to be true of guys seen and it simply wasn't. You can ignore most of the marketing around guys seen and just check what the bot ratio feels like day to day outside the big cities.

What nobody mentions about guys seen is whether it is genuinely free or free until you try to reply outside the big cities.

That's my read on guys seen, anyway.

After a fair bit of testing: guys seen has been mixed for me and I'll explain why. For guys seen, what you lose by never paying is the difference between useful and a waste of an evening.

That's where I've landed on guys seen, may not hold for you.

Disagree with @Avery on guys seen. The version of guys seen I used had none of that. If you're evaluating guys seen, start with what the search filters can actually do once you are past sign-up — everything else follows. Started on Datelink in particular and never fully moved off it.

That's where I've landed on guys seen; ask if you want the detail.

Short version: guys seen gets recommended a lot here and that is half right. Where guys seen falls down for me is how thin it gets in smaller towns in practice.

The checks that saved me time on guys seen if you're short on time:

• Time whether last-active timestamps look plausible at the hour you would actually be using it
• Note what the block and report flow actually does on mobile data, not office wifi
• Look at how many profiles carry more than two photos before you commit any time to it
• Note what happens to your visibility after a week of silence and write the answer down

I judge guys seen almost entirely on what you lose by never paying in practice.

Worked for me on guys seen, and I would be glad to hear others found different.

Sorry @ElenaR, I've spent longer on guys seen than that answer suggests. The thing that decides it for guys seen is whether the app is usable or bloated day to day. Kept luvdate.site open in another tab to compare.

Worked for me on guys seen, may not hold for you.

Going to push back on @Abigail here. Guys seen behaved very differently for me. The honest test for guys seen is how fast it loads on a bad connection once you are past sign-up, not the feature list.

That's the short version on guys seen, anyway.

My read: guys seen is fine if you go in with low expectations. For guys seen, what the day-to-day traffic feels like outside the big cities is the difference between useful and a waste of an evening.

That's how guys seen went for me — happy to be argued with.

Unpopular view, maybe: guys seen is fine if you go in with low expectations. What nobody mentions about guys seen is how the interface holds up on mobile day to day.

Worked for me on guys seen, though clearly it varies by region.

Going against the thread here: guys seen is a decent starting point and a poor destination. The thing that decides it for guys seen is whether verification actually filters anyone. I ran the same test on turndate.site and got a cleaner result.

My rule with guys seen: how photo permissions are handled at the times you actually log in first, everything else second.

That's what six weeks of guys seen taught me, though clearly it varies by region.

@EmmaC might be right in principle, but guys seen rarely behaves that cleanly. You can ignore most of the marketing around guys seen and just check how photo permissions are handled on mobile.

I judge guys seen almost entirely on what the bot ratio feels like day to day.

That's the short version on guys seen, though clearly it varies by region.