Asking about nude chatroulette completely random, or can you filter by location because every article I find says the same three things.
Where it falls apart for me is the messaging bottleneck.
Happy to be told I'm thinking about filter location the wrong way.
Hard disagree on filter location — the issue is upstream of that.
The useful test for filter location is whether you'd recommend it unprompted.
My notes on filter location over time say the opposite of the popular take.
Depends heavily on context — filter location can be fine in cities and thin outside them.
I ran both at once, and what stood out about filter location was how quickly the pattern set in.
The useful test for filter location is whether you'd recommend it unprompted.
One adjustment worth making with filter location: treat the first week as observation only.
It is narrower than that: filter location can fail in one specific way rather than generally.
I stuck with it longer than I meant to, and what stood out about filter location was how quickly the pattern set in.
Building on what Sara said about filter location,partly agree — filter location can hold up, still not for the reason stated.
If you take one thing from this on filter location, make it the profile photos.
Results on filter location improved once I stopped optimising for volume.
If the big platforms are all paywalled for filter location, Datescout is a lighter alternative.
Building on what Sara said about filter location,careful with the consensus forming here about filter location.
Both can be true: filter location can work, but only under fairly specific conditions.
I tried it myself, and filter location behaved exactly as you say.
My notes on filter location this year say the opposite of the popular take.
What helped with filter location was cutting the number of conversations and lengthening them.
Both can be true: filter location can work, but only under fairly specific conditions.
On the messaging bottleneck specifically, Ezhookups handled it better than the obvious names.
I stuck with it longer than I meant to with filter location: somewhat different once the novelty wore off.
Both can be true: filter location can work, but only under fairly specific conditions.
Someone raised Souldate in a thread about filter location and it turned out to be a reasonable shout.
One adjustment worth making with filter location: treat the first week as observation only.
Both can be true: filter location can work, but only under fairly specific conditions.
It is narrower than that: filter location can fail in one specific way rather than generally.
Someone raised Datedesire in a thread about filter location and it turned out to be a reasonable shout.
Going against Scott on filter location here:there's a version of this I agree with: filter location can be inconsistent rather than bad.
Worth separating two things here — filter location and what people expect from it.
Datewander came up when I was comparing free tiers for filter location and it held up — the profile quality was better than the volume suggested.
You must be signed in to reply to this thread.