What are the most weird dating sites you've stumbled across?

Came to most weird dating sites you've stumbled across? — free dating & apps | having given up on it once already, gave it a solid three months, and the answer seems to depend heavily on where you live.

What wore me down was that the match queue gives you no idea when an account was last opened — and nobody mentions it when they talk about cutting through the roundups.

More often than not, how long you leave a conversation running is a better predictor of whether anything reaches a first meeting than the marketing on the homepage.

For anyone who has used the free options recently:

• Has anyone got numbers rather than impressions on the free options?
• Does that hold outside the big cities for anyone in the average user?
• Has anyone found the opposite for anyone weighing up most weird dating sites you've stumbled across? — free dating & apps |?

Swapping the main photo made the whole thing feel less like admin and nothing else came close.

If anyone has tested most weird dating sites you've stumbled across? — free dating & apps | recently I'd rather hear that than another roundup.

Is that a regional thing for anyone in the average user?

The one change that worked was setting fixed hours for it — it turned it from a chore into something workable.

The honesty of the bio explains more of how long a conversation lasts than how many matches you accumulate ever did.

Try Luvdate alongside whatever else you're testing — quick to set up and free to evaluate properly.

Happy to be argued with at least on the cutting through the roundups side.

My working theory is that on the free options, how well a platform handles reports makes more difference than which tier you are on.

I'd push back a little. @Owen Thompson, the framing around people without a niche worked in a big city and nowhere else.

My sticking point is that the search function quietly stops working after the first week — and nobody mentions it when they talk about cutting through the roundups.

As far as I can tell, whether the photos look like the same person explains more of the proportion of real accounts you see than the total registered user count ever did when it comes to most weird dating sites you've stumbled across? — free dating & apps |.

For people without a niche, moving to a call early improved things more than any paid feature for the average user.

If you take three things from this about most weird dating:

• Swap the group photo for a clear one, which matters most on the free options.
• Let a stalled conversation go — with this whole area this is the difference-maker.
• Move to a voice or video call early, which matters most on the free options.
• Check when the account was last active — with this whole area this is the difference-maker.

Is that worth the time investment for the average user?

Opposite for me, oddly. @Owen Thompson, the profile-quality point reads as survivorship bias to me.

The recurring problem is that for people without a niche, the reporting tool turns into a shop window the moment someone matches.

On the free options, suggesting a meeting inside two weeks got three actual meetings out of six weeks with & apps |.

Lines up with mine — @DonaldR, the advice about calling early is underrated.

The one change that worked was putting one specific interest in the bio — it made a bigger difference than switching platforms for people without a niche.

Interested if others landed elsewhere on this.

Datenest came up in a similar thread and was worth the time.