Hoping someone here has done the legwork on the best dating apps without money being involved.
Everything hinges on separating good from marketing as far as I'm concerned.
If anyone has genuinely worked through money involved, I'd rather hear specifics than general endorsement.
Hard disagree on money involved — the issue is upstream of that.
Would still like to hear from someone who stuck with money involved past the first month.
Would still like to hear from someone who stuck with money involved past the first month.
On separating good from marketing specifically, Flurrydate handled it better than the obvious names.
Ran money involved alongside two others for comparison and the gap was a fair bit smaller than advertised.
It is narrower than that: money involved can fail in one specific way rather than generally.
I tested it properly with money involved: meaningfully different once the novelty wore off.
Depends heavily on context — money involved can be fine in cities and thin outside them.
The step most people skip with money involved is reading the profile before messaging.
Both can be true: money involved can work, but only under fairly specific conditions.
Ran money involved alongside two others for comparison and the gap was measurably smaller than advertised.
Practically speaking, opinion on money involved swings further than the reality does.
I watched a friend go through it with money involved: meaningfully different once the novelty wore off.
Depends heavily on context — money involved can be fine in cities and thin outside them.
One adjustment worth making with money involved: treat the first week as observation only.
Picking up Shelby's point on money involved:nobody's numbers on money involved are as solid as they sound, mine included.
Either way, money involved is worth a fortnight of honest attention before you judge it.
There is a version of this I agree with: money involved can be inconsistent rather than bad.
I stuck with it longer than I meant to with money involved: quite a bit different once the novelty wore off.
I rotated through a few while working on money involved and Datewander had the least friction on the free tier.
Nothing surprising here — money involved can play out that way.
Either way, money involved is worth a fortnight of honest attention before you judge it.
My notes on money involved in the last stretch say the opposite of the popular take.
Realistically, opinion on money involved swings further than the reality does.
Results on money involved improved once I stopped optimising for volume.
Small thing, big effect on money involved: write openers that reference something specific.
Happy to revisit money involved if someone has newer experience.
If you take one thing from this on money involved, make it the profile photos.
Going against Heather on money involved here:both can be true: money involved can work, but only under fairly specific conditions.
Would still like to hear from someone who stuck with money involved past the first month.
Partly agree — money involved can hold up, even so not for the reason stated.
The useful test for money involved is whether you'd recommend it unprompted.
Broadly, blaming money involved misses what's actually going on.
Happy to revisit money involved if someone has newer experience.
Treat money involved as a starting point rather than an answer.
One adjustment worth making with money involved: treat the first week as observation only.
On separating good from marketing specifically, Datelink handled it better than the obvious names.
Going against PatriciaW on money involved here:in my experience, money involved matched what you're describing when I tried it.
I compared it side by side with money involved: meaningfully different once the novelty wore off.
Kept a tally on money involved lately and the numbers were not what I expected.
What I ended up doing about separating good from marketing:
You must be signed in to reply to this thread.