Let's rank OLD

[SwordofFlame]

I've had the best luck with:

 

1) Okc

2) Tinder

3) Bumble

4) CMB

5) Hinge

[Gr8fuln2020]

So, would someone please describe the clietele for such sites as Bumble, CMB and Tinder? Are we talking about younger daters? Never heard of Bumble, Hinge or CMB. (Or not...don't really care, but curious).

[joseb]

So, would someone please describe the clietele for such sites as Bumble, CMB and Tinder? Are we talking about younger daters? Never heard of Bumble, Hinge or CMB. (Or not...don't really care, but curious).

 

Never used CMB or head of Hinge.

 

Bumble has one serious flaw - when you match, if the lady doesnt message you in 24 hours then poof - match gone.

So I've had tons of good looking matches just go away without even being able to talk to them. Having said that, of the matches that replied, I've met a couple and dated one so its not all bad. Not sure of age demographics, I mostly meet 30s, there are a fair few of those here, but less people in general than Tinder.

 

Tinder was great initially, but it seems like their algorithm starts breaking down when you have been using it in an area for a few months. Not sure what or why, but I'd say my match percentage is about 1/4 of what it was for the first month. I've met a few from here, mix of all sorts, some were just happy to hook up, most wanted something a bit more serious. Plenty of people of all ages.

 

I've just tried clover, it looks promising, with useful paid for features (I'm using the free one).

Edited August 15, 2016 by joseb

[salparadise]

I have tried quite a few dating sites over the years, like you I had no luck with Tinder.

 

1) OkCupid. Overall I would say this is the best of the dating sites I have tried. Large user base, at least where I live, reasonably easy to set up dates and those dates overall go fairly well. The only downside is that there are quite a few women using it whom seem to have no intention of meeting up.

 

IMHO, OKC outclasses them all by a mile. The match scores are pretty good for getting you in the ballpark on major compatibility issues. It doesn't predict chemistry, of course, but if a person has a match score in the 90s and they've answered quite a few questions, it's a pretty safe bet that you will be on similar wavelengths. Not perfect but so much better than total randomness.

 

In my neck of the woods most of the people with college educations, advanced degrees and mid to upper socioeconomic status use OKC. Some use multiple sites, and there is one exception that I know of who uses POF.

 

I hate POF, although I kept the account open when I was single because it was free and there was nothing to lose.

 

The problem with the paid sites (match.com) is that when people let their paid account expire, the site keeps their profiles active to use as bait. They can't respond to messages without re-upping. So if you see someone you're interested in it's just a crapshoot as to whether they're a current paid member and able to respond. For guys it's terribly frustrating because we have to put effort into the messages. Women can just say, "howdy-do" and a guy will respond... if he's paid.

 

I sent match a help request a few years ago asking how do I know if the person is able to respond to my message, because I don't want to waste my time messaging people who cannot respond. The sent back a response that didn't address the question at all, basically answering a different question. I kept asking with reworded questions, explaining and being very specific... but they would never admit to keeping the dead profiles up or that there is no way to distinguish between them. So I cancelled and never went back.

 

When you think about what would happen over time... the number of dead profiles grows and grows and eventually the number of active members is small compared to the ones that are expired and abandoned.

 

If you're looking for better prospects go with OKC, but remember it's up to you to sort them out. There are always going to be a ton of undesirables on any site.

[AMJ]

I think it's better if you ask people in your city/region which sites are most popular. It really depends on where you live.

[joseb]

I've just tried clover, it looks promising, with useful paid for features (I'm using the free one).

 

Ok I've now tried clover for longer and in three countries.

It appears to be full of scanners unfortunately.

That or im just getting liked my all these amazingly hot young women

[LookAtThisPOst]

IMHO, OKC outclasses them all by a mile. The match scores are pretty good for getting you in the ballpark on major compatibility issues. It doesn't predict chemistry, of course, but if a person has a match score in the 90s and they've answered quite a few questions, it's a pretty safe bet that you will be on similar wavelengths. Not perfect but so much better than total randomness.

 

In my neck of the woods most of the people with college educations, advanced degrees and mid to upper socioeconomic status use OKC. Some use multiple sites, and there is one exception that I know of who uses POF.

 

I hate POF, although I kept the account open when I was single because it was free and there was nothing to lose.

 

The problem with the paid sites (match.com) is that when people let their paid account expire, the site keeps their profiles active to use as bait. They can't respond to messages without re-upping. So if you see someone you're interested in it's just a crapshoot as to whether they're a current paid member and able to respond. For guys it's terribly frustrating because we have to put effort into the messages. Women can just say, "howdy-do" and a guy will respond... if he's paid.

 

I sent match a help request a few years ago asking how do I know if the person is able to respond to my message, because I don't want to waste my time messaging people who cannot respond. The sent back a response that didn't address the question at all, basically answering a different question. I kept asking with reworded questions, explaining and being very specific... but they would never admit to keeping the dead profiles up or that there is no way to distinguish between them. So I cancelled and never went back.

 

When you think about what would happen over time... the number of dead profiles grows and grows and eventually the number of active members is small compared to the ones that are expired and abandoned.

 

If you're looking for better prospects go with OKC, but remember it's up to you to sort them out. There are always going to be a ton of undesirables on any site.

 

OKC doesn't offer much in my search results, very limited search results as they use some sort of silly algorithm to match you.

 

I wind up being distracted by those that appear in the RIGHT MARGIN of a person's profile. Similar to Facebooks, "Suggested Friends" section.

 

Usually the SAME people on OKC are also on POF. So it's kind of moot.

 

Friend of mine told me he thinks POF is a big cesspool of bums and vagrants. lol

[LookAtThisPOst]

The problem with the paid sites (match.com) is that when people let their paid account expire, the site keeps their profiles active to use as bait. They can't respond to messages without re-upping. So if you see someone you're interested in it's just a crapshoot as to whether they're a current paid member and able to respond. For guys it's terribly frustrating because we have to put effort into the messages. Women can just say, "howdy-do" and a guy will respond... if he's paid.

 

Well, you COULD sort by "activity" keep an eye out for the "online nows" or "online in the past few days" Match.com profiles, that way they are more likely active/paying members.

 

Of course, they could be "active" daily, non-paying browsers. lol

[LookAtThisPOst]

IMHO, OKC outclasses them all by a mile. The match scores are pretty good for getting you in the ballpark on major compatibility issues. It doesn't predict chemistry, of course, but if a person has a match score in the 90s and they've answered quite a few questions, it's a pretty safe bet that you will be on similar wavelengths. Not perfect but so much better than total randomness.

 

I used to put my chips in the whole "% match" thing, even contacted women that were 99% matched with me...still no response. *shrug*.....so I pretty much negate that percentage and just contact those that appeal to me as they would if they were on any OTHER dating site.

 

The non-responses to high percentages, which at first gave me high hopes at a response, became irrelevant after all that.

[salparadise]

I used to put my chips in the whole "% match" thing, even contacted women that were 99% matched with me...still no response. *shrug*.....so I pretty much negate that percentage and just contact those that appeal to me as they would if they were on any OTHER dating site.

 

The non-responses to high percentages, which at first gave me high hopes at a response, became irrelevant after all that.

 

I guess everyone's experience is a bit different. I get an extremely high response rate with high percentage people if I use something in her profile as a conversation starter.

 

OKC doesn't offer much in my search results, very limited search results as they use some sort of silly algorithm to match you.

 

I don't think they limit who you can see based on the algorithm. It's the criteria you use to search by.

 

I don't know where you live, but all the intelligent, sophisticated women are using OKC in my neck of the woods. I live in a mostly rural area, but in a college town. So the vast majority in the wider area are uneducated, undesirable, and look the part. But in my town, and in a few other towns some distance away there are plenty of attractive, intelligent, educated women... and they use OKC almost exclusively. You can even select by education level and a number of other criteria if you pay for A-list features.

 

I've had two long-term relationships since being divorced several years ago, and both of them I met on OKC, and they had match percentages of 97 and 99 percent.

 

Friend of mine told me he thinks POF is a big cesspool of bums and vagrants.

 

I'd have to agree with your friend. There may be occasional exceptions, but where I am it's two completely different classes of people on these two sites.

[Kamille]

I'm currently trying Bumble. It's a quick-match site, but women have to message first. It's a bit of an adjustment at first but I'm liking that it evens the playing field. I get less attention than on other sites, but those who write back seem genuinely interested (instead of happy for any attention they get).

[LookAtThisPOst]

I guess everyone's experience is a bit different. I get an extremely high response rate with high percentage people if I use something in her profile as a conversation starter.

 

 

 

I don't think they limit who you can see based on the algorithm. It's the criteria you use to search by.

 

I don't know where you live, but all the intelligent, sophisticated women are using OKC in my neck of the woods. I live in a mostly rural area, but in a college town. So the vast majority in the wider area are uneducated, undesirable, and look the part. But in my town, and in a few other towns some distance away there are plenty of attractive, intelligent, educated women... and they use OKC almost exclusively. You can even select by education level and a number of other criteria if you pay for A-list features.

 

I don't pay extra for A-List features, not worth it to me. Where I live it's more suburban, and then a few miles north...rural. About an hour from me is a major city...though women there think I live too far when they find out where I live.

 

Again, the same faces across each site appear in my search criteria usually and they've been non-responsive, EVEN, like you Sal, point out the particulars in their profiles. The kind of women you speak of, do exist in this area, but they are few and far between...you usually have to wait for them to trickle into town, realize "WTF? It's retirees and rednecks around here!" and thus they throw up a profile. LOL

 

They usually come here to be near their retired parents or work opportunities or both. Apparently, going to the county fair or local flea market to meet other singles is something not desirable if one is single and looking. :-)

 

Usually, I see them continue their membership here as they haven't found anyone yet, OR are return members as they have announced, "I'm back and trying this again!" flashing light in their profiles. Of course, I've already emailed them, without response...so when I see them return...I'm like, "Should I email her...again to see if she maybe lessened her laundry list of unrealistic expectations?"

 

They eventually become permanent fixtures of the sites.

 

I've had two long-term relationships since being divorced several years ago, and both of them I met on OKC, and they had match percentages of 97 and 99 percent.

 

Well, I recall that I did have a 98% go out with me, but most times it's moot as could be a 99%'er, but if you're short or bald or whatever physical flaw that doesn't appeal to them in the picture, that percentage is irrelevant to them.

[insert_name]

IMHO, OKC outclasses them all by a mile. The match scores are pretty good for getting you in the ballpark on major compatibility issues. It doesn't predict chemistry, of course, but if a person has a match score in the 90s and they've answered quite a few questions, it's a pretty safe bet that you will be on similar wavelengths. Not perfect but so much better than total randomness.

 

In my neck of the woods most of the people with college educations, advanced degrees and mid to upper socioeconomic status use OKC. Some use multiple sites, and there is one exception that I know of who uses POF.

 

I hate POF, although I kept the account open when I was single because it was free and there was nothing to lose.

 

The problem with the paid sites (match.com) is that when people let their paid account expire, the site keeps their profiles active to use as bait. They can't respond to messages without re-upping. So if you see someone you're interested in it's just a crapshoot as to whether they're a current paid member and able to respond. For guys it's terribly frustrating because we have to put effort into the messages. Women can just say, "howdy-do" and a guy will respond... if he's paid.

 

I sent match a help request a few years ago asking how do I know if the person is able to respond to my message, because I don't want to waste my time messaging people who cannot respond. The sent back a response that didn't address the question at all, basically answering a different question. I kept asking with reworded questions, explaining and being very specific... but they would never admit to keeping the dead profiles up or that there is no way to distinguish between them. So I cancelled and never went back.

 

When you think about what would happen over time... the number of dead profiles grows and grows and eventually the number of active members is small compared to the ones that are expired and abandoned.

 

If you're looking for better prospects go with OKC, but remember it's up to you to sort them out. There are always going to be a ton of undesirables on any site.

 

Yeah there was some number crunching done a couple of years ago on Match's self proclaimed number of total accounts vs their self proclaimed paid for subscribers and at that time it worked out that the average user would have to send 10 messages just to be sure that 1 of those recipients was even able to reply!

 

So basically, as women rarely if ever initiate, the average males experience is evenot worse on match than on a free site because not only do they have the usual crap with the free sites where the response rate is likely to be low, you are adding an extra level of pain on top where first you have to message someone capable of replying before you even factor in the rejection rate!

 

It always makes me laugh when people talk about how paying for a dating site means serious people and extra quality, you are mugging yourself off by using match. It was the worst £60 I have ever spent. The pickings were barely any better than okc (it was mostly the same people) which meant I sent 12 messages in total and got no response whereas I would get a response every 3 or 4 messages on okc.

 

If you aren't a top 5% male on Match then you may as well spend your subscription money on lottery tickets instead and win a girl over with your newfound wealth, the odds of finding a relationship are lower using that method than by finding someone through Match

Edited August 23, 2016 by insert_name

[Michelle ma Belle]

I've one of those that has tried just about all of them at one point or another from the big brands to the more obscure ones. Yes, I managed to garner a lot of interest but that doesn't mean much when you're constantly meeting prospects who turn out to be serious disappointments. Thankfully I did manage to meet and date a handful of good guys mostly from a smaller more obscure dating site but it wasn't without a LOT of vetting on my part. It can feel like a full time job sometimes.

 

My evaluation? They're all pretty much the same. Even the paid ones. When you're dealing with anything online you run the risk of bumping into questionable people with shady agendas. The more open and free the site the worse it is obviously but paid sites aren't that much better. I paid premium bucks for a one month membership on eHarmony and ended up being matched with and went on dates with two men WHO WERE MARRIED!

 

Moral of the story? It's all a bunch of bullsh*t. You've just got to abandon any expectations and/or preconceived notions about OLD, practice discernment at all times and adopt a healthy sense of humor. And with any luck you may end up meeting a handful of decent prospects who'll keep you believing in a happily-ever-after online.

 

[LookAtThisPOst]

I've one of those that has tried just about all of them at one point or another from the big brands to the more obscure ones. Yes, I managed to garner a lot of interest but that doesn't mean much when you're constantly meeting prospects who turn out to be serious disappointments. Thankfully I did manage to meet and date a handful of good guys mostly from a smaller more obscure dating site but it wasn't without a LOT of vetting on my part. It can feel like a full time job sometimes.

 

My evaluation? They're all pretty much the same. Even the paid ones. When you're dealing with anything online you run the risk of bumping into questionable people with shady agendas. The more open and free the site the worse it is obviously but paid sites aren't that much better. I paid premium bucks for a one month membership on eHarmony and ended up being matched with and went on dates with two men WHO WERE MARRIED!

 

Moral of the story? It's all a bunch of bullsh*t. You've just got to abandon any expectations and/or preconceived notions about OLD, practice discernment at all times and adopt a healthy sense of humor. And with any luck you may end up meeting a handful of decent prospects who'll keep you believing in a happily-ever-after online.

 

 

This makes me wonder if the pendulum will swing back to dating people you meet in person, aka social events/Meetups or wherever out and about. That way you have much less people to weed through and just take your time organically getting to know a smaller circle of people.

 

This eliminates the paradox of choice or too many choices.

[Michelle ma Belle]

This makes me wonder if the pendulum will swing back to dating people you meet in person, aka social events/Meetups or wherever out and about. That way you have much less people to weed through and just take your time organically getting to know a smaller circle of people.

 

This eliminates the paradox of choice or too many choices.

 

Well it has for me. The single two best LT relationships I've had were with men I didn't meet on a dating site at all. It evolved very naturally over time.

 

I'm of the era where meeting organically was the way it was done and definitely my preferred way to meet. However, as pointed out countless times on here regarding this topic, sometimes OLD is the best and even the only option some people have when it comes to meeting the opposite sex.

 

Thankfully I'm a woman who is quite content being single but do very much enjoy the companionship that comes from dating and being in a relationship so that's what brings me to OLD from time to time.

 

I just think people shouldn't put all their eggs in one basket. Unless it's just about sex. Sex is easy online, it's finding meaningful relationships that goes beyond just knocking boots that seems to be the bigger challenge more often than not.

[SevenCity]

Can someone explain the intent of scammers on these sites? Is it to catfish you where you plan to meet up with a good looking woman only to end beat up and robbed in the gutter? Or is it trying to scam money from you online like send me money and I'll be yours?

 

I've seen some of the Asian women on POF or match with little to no English skills and I wonder if those are the scammers profiles or just off the boat women?

[joseb]

Can someone explain the intent of scammers on these sites? Is it to catfish you where you plan to meet up with a good looking woman only to end beat up and robbed in the gutter? Or is it trying to scam money from you online like send me money and I'll be yours?

 

I've seen some of the Asian women on POF or match with little to no English skills and I wonder if those are the scammers profiles or just off the boat women?

 

I haven't had any really "play me" yet, they mostly just match and maybe sense when I'm not falling all over them that I'm not an easy target.

 

I think a typical scam is to play the woe is me, I need money once they get you interested. Be it asking you to pay for a web cam show, or maybe to help get them away from their ex who is violent, etc etc.

[SevenCity]

I haven't had any really "play me" yet, they mostly just match and maybe sense when I'm not falling all over them that I'm not an easy target.

 

I think a typical scam is to play the woe is me, I need money once they get you interested. Be it asking you to pay for a web cam show, or maybe to help get them away from their ex who is violent, etc etc.

 

Thanks for the insight.

[Michelle ma Belle]

Can someone explain the intent of scammers on these sites? Is it to catfish you where you plan to meet up with a good looking woman only to end beat up and robbed in the gutter? Or is it trying to scam money from you online like send me money and I'll be yours?

 

I've seen some of the Asian women on POF or match with little to no English skills and I wonder if those are the scammers profiles or just off the boat women?

 

There are all kinds.

 

Some of just people living vicarious through fake profiles, very much like the Catfish show as seen on MTV. No intentions of ever meeting or anything just pretending to be someone they're not, often engaging inappropriately with several pawns at once. Mostly this is done for sh*ts and giggles.

 

Other scammers are out there to swindle money. Again, pretending to someone they're not, often living abroad, fanning the flames of desire and always confessing their "love" very early before they drop the hammer about needing some cash to help them out of a pickle, illness or pay for their flight to come visit or whatever. They've become quite crafty over the years as more and more people become suspicious.

 

Then there are those who are webcam girls and/or prostitutes. Reeling in unassuming and naive men until they eyeball deep in the thick of things and credit card compromised.

 

And then we can't forget about those shifty characters who trap people in uncompromising sexual positions only to use these pics/videos to blackmail them for money.

 

There are now websites dedicated to exposing these 'scammers' where you can go and check out the kind of emails they use, the names and profile pictures they typically use, where they creep, etc. It's quite an elaborate production on both ends.

 

The list is endless really.

[SevenCity]

There are all kinds.

 

Some of just people living vicarious through fake profiles, very much like the Catfish show as seen on MTV. No intentions of ever meeting or anything just pretending to be someone they're not, often engaging inappropriately with several pawns at once. Mostly this is done for sh*ts and giggles.

 

Other scammers are out there to swindle money. Again, pretending to someone they're not, often living abroad, fanning the flames of desire and always confessing their "love" very early before they drop the hammer about needing some cash to help them out of a pickle, illness or pay for their flight to come visit or whatever. They've become quite crafty over the years as more and more people become suspicious.

 

Then there are those who are webcam girls and/or prostitutes. Reeling in unassuming and naive men until they eyeball deep in the thick of things and credit card compromised.

 

And then we can't forget about those shifty characters who trap people in uncompromising sexual positions only to use these pics/videos to blackmail them for money.

 

There are now websites dedicated to exposing these 'scammers' where you can go and check out the kind of emails they use, the names and profile pictures they typically use, where they creep, etc. It's quite an elaborate production on both ends.

 

The list is endless really.

 

That's good to hear - seems that some common sense can avoid most of not all of these. Thank you.

[salparadise]

Can someone explain the intent of scammers on these sites? Is it to catfish you where you plan to meet up with a good looking woman only to end beat up and robbed in the gutter? Or is it trying to scam money from you online like send me money and I'll be yours?

 

I've seen some of the Asian women on POF or match with little to no English skills and I wonder if those are the scammers profiles or just off the boat women?

 

It's called a "romance scam" and they're typically located in Nigeria, Ghana, and Russia. The method is pretty simple. They look for people who are susceptible, naive, and easily conned. Their rather obvious profiles actually help them filter out the savvy people such that anyone who responds with sincerity is probably a good target.

 

They first have to get the person invested, to start feeling like they've met a special person who wants a future with them. The longer these susceptible types correspond the more invested they become... and the more they believe in the legitimacy of the scammer, and the greater their hope and belief in having met their life partner. So desperate, lonely people make the best targets. They target both men and women.

 

Eventually they will run into some temporary financial issue, such as having lost their wallet in a foreign country and just needing $50 or so to help get a new ID so they can access their funds or whatever. Psychologically, getting this first money transfer is the key. After that people tend to be so averse to thinking they've been scammed that they go into total denial. The financial situation turns out to be more difficult than initially thought and more payments are requested to help them get out of the foreign country (usually Ghana).

 

They have to come clean on where they are (unless they have an agent working stateside) because they will be requesting the money be wired via Western Union to a specific office and they'll have to give you the address and a name (for which they have ID).

 

People have been bilked out of large sums of money this way. Hundreds of thousands of dollars. It works because the more money you're in for, the more you believe in the legitimacy of the person––people will deny objective proof to avoid having to face the reality that they were scammed and gave away all of that money.

 

Check out Romancescam.com to learn a lot more. Sometimes people play this scammers - called keeping them as pets! Yes, I have done this before. I've taken them up to the point of the first money transfer and agreed to send them money, but then started making all sorts of excuses as to what I was having a hard time sending the money. Then doing all sorts of other stuff to frustrate them. It's fun if you have the inclination and time.

Edited August 23, 2016 by salparadise

[LookAtThisPOst]

It's called a "romance scam" and they're typically located in Nigeria, Ghana, and Russia. The method is pretty simple. They look for people who are susceptible, naive, and easily conned. Their rather obvious profiles actually help them filter out the savvy people such that anyone who responds with sincerity is probably a good target.

 

Believe it or not, this can happen locally AND in real life. A friend of mine told me a friend of hers met the guy in person for a typical date. Later he tried to tell her a sob story and get her to wire money to him.

 

I clarified by asking, "You sure this wasn't some online, faceless Nigerian scam?" she was like, "Nope, she met with him in the flesh!!"

[salparadise]

Then there are those who are webcam girls and/or prostitutes. Reeling in unassuming and naive men until they eyeball deep in the thick of things and credit card compromised.

 

The cam-gurls are everywhere. Some are actually cam-girls for real I assume, but mostly they're trying to get your credit card info. They tell you it's actually free, but they require a credit card to ensure you're over 18 years old. There will be some shady-looking site they want you to sign into. Anyone who is naive enough to give them a credit card number probably ought to get scammed.

[salparadise]

Believe it or not, this can happen locally AND in real life. A friend of mine told me a friend of hers met the guy in person for a typical date. Later he tried to tell her a sob story and get her to wire money to him.

 

I clarified by asking, "You sure this wasn't some online, faceless Nigerian scam?" she was like, "Nope, she met with him in the flesh!!"

 

 

Oh I don't doubt it. An American with good language skills and a smooth story could do a lot better with more sophisticated targets.

 

But, this is a huge, organized industry in Ghana. It's organized crime and they have resources. The people doing the messaging and posing as the person take a lot of instruction from supervisors... and it may even be a team of people posing as a single person.

 

The one thing they can't fake is English language skills. They never get articles correct and it sticks out like a sore thumb to native English speakers.