Best Dating Site?

[introverted1]

What is your recommendation for the best OLD site for a mid-20's professional woman looking for a serious relationship?

 

From what I've read, Match and eHarmony are mentioned most, but was hoping for some real-world input.

 

Thanks!

[lilmissjava]

You get what you pay for, but when I was on Match, I received a lot of bogus messages, even when I became a subscriber. I have met a lot of people though who have had great success with it.

 

Demographics has a lot to do with it though. The bigger the area, the more availability. If you live in a small city or town, there isn't much to choose from.

 

A lot of people use Tinder, but that's generally viewed as a hookup app, but then again you run that risk with any dating service lol. POF has some good people, but again, lot's of fake profiles.

 

I would try all of them and see what one works best for you.

[Shanex]

Paid OLD sites or not?

 

Paid sites : Match and eharmony

Free sites : Tinder (mobile app), Plenty of fish. Okcupid.

 

Yes tinder is more a hookup app. But this might be a start to more.

 

ETA: ie not everybody is on Tinder for hook-ups, no everybody on paid sites are looking for commitment, for the record.

Edited April 14, 2016 by Shanex

[LydiaLong]

I think the best dating site to meet quality people is eharmony.com

 

It will cost you, but you get what you pay for.

[SwordofFlame]

If you're mid-20s I would guess okcupid. A lot of the paid dating sites tend to have more older folks.

[Larryville]

This keeps coming up and I’m gonna keep saying. There is no BEST dating site, the site is irrelevant, what is always more important is the region in which you are selecting from.

 

I live in the Midwest (USA) basically the same freaking people (women) are on several sites, what is the raw number of people in your pool or search parameter. There are about 2.2 million people in my "search area" how many women who are "available" would meet my specific (or yours) out of that 2.2 million, maybe a few dozen? Every woman or man on whatever site is NOT available to you.

 

Also all most will move around and or tweak things like “distance” or change up primary photo or even change aspects of a profile. It also depends on what you are seeking and the effort you are willing to put into your search.

 

If you are a man or woman of quality THAT is the most important aspect NOT what site you are using.

 

OLD is a billion dollar enterprise and they make that money because they set everyone up to “fail” NOT succeed and this idea that there is a “best” site is frankly nonsense.

[Gloria25]

You get what you pay for, but when I was on Match, I received a lot of bogus messages, even when I became a subscriber. I have met a lot of people though who have had great success with it.

 

Demographics has a lot to do with it though. The bigger the area, the more availability. If you live in a small city or town, there isn't much to choose from.

 

A lot of people use Tinder, but that's generally viewed as a hookup app, but then again you run that risk with any dating service lol. POF has some good people, but again, lot's of fake profiles.

 

I would try all of them and see what one works best for you.

 

IMO, all of them - even the paying ones have fake profiles and/or they use the people's profile information to make it look like they're active when they aren't.

 

I'm to the point where I think they're blocking your attempts to contact people too....to keep you searching.

 

And, of the ones that are for real? You gotta fish through them to make sure they're not lying about their RL status (married), pics, and/or intentions (on a "dating" website instead of a "hook-up" site like Tinder).

 

I just say you gotta look through them, be persistent and cautious. I've met people who were ok and for real, but you got a sift through a lot of crap to meet them.

[Gloria25]

This keeps coming up and I’m gonna keep saying. There is no BEST dating site, the site is irrelevant, what is always more important is the region in which you are selecting from.

 

I live in the Midwest (USA) basically the same freaking people (women) are on several sites, what is the raw number of people in your pool or search parameter. There are about 2.2 million people in my "search area" how many women who are "available" would meet my specific (or yours) out of that 2.2 million, maybe a few dozen? Every woman or man on whatever site is NOT available to you.

 

Also all most will move around and or tweak things like “distance” or change up primary photo or even change aspects of a profile. It also depends on what you are seeking and the effort you are willing to put into your search.

 

If you are a man or woman of quality THAT is the most important aspect NOT what site you are using.

 

OLD is a billion dollar enterprise and they make that money because they set everyone up to “fail” NOT succeed and this idea that there is a “best” site is frankly nonsense.

 

Gosh, I read your post just after I posted mine and so agree. I mean, on top of the fake profiles, I started to suspect that they are messing with your ability to contact people - even though you're paying. I know they filter out personal contact stuff (i.e. e-mails, tel numbers) that you insert in your messages - to force people you're contacting to also become paying members - but, I suspect they're taking it up a notch and not even letting some of your messages to be sent and/or read, even though they claim as a paying member the people you initiate contact with can see your message.

[SwordofFlame]

It also doesn't require much effort to have profiles on apps like Coffee Meets Bagel and Hinge. The apps do the work for you to bring you matches.

[hasaquestion]

I can't speak for the female experience. But as a male, whenever I see someone on here "advise" a poster not to use _______ because it's a "hookup site", or to use _______ because it's a "dating site", I cringe.

 

I dated someone for a year and a half who I met on Tinder and I know Tinder couples. Tons of people use OK Cupid to hook up. It has little to do with which site you use. I mean, if you join "Swinging Iguana-Owners Only dot com" I guess you might be buying into a demographic. But the major dating services? Not really.

 

Second, thinking that OK Cupid is for dates and Tinder is for hookups is symptomatic of a greater issue - putting the cart before the horse. Attraction is attraction, and before people decide if they want to date you or hook up with you, they have to decide if they're attracted to you. These apps and sites are means for people to contact people they are attracted to. Again, I can't speak for women. But as a man, if you think a hookup and a relationship are that fundamentally different at the beginning, then you don't understand one, the other, or both.

[d0nnivain]

I agree with whoever said there is no single universal BEST out there. You have to find the best for you. That may be a function of geography. Besides the big sites, which are great if you are in a big city but not so hot if you are not, look at the niche sites; a common interest is probably more important then the best site.

 

While I was on e-harmony, DH was on Match so we had no shot at connecting electronically.

 

Meeting people IRL is always the best.

 

Remember OLD & apps are only tools. You need to search for your date in multiple ways.

[HillValley]

I agree with whoever said there is no single universal BEST out there. You have to find the best for you. That may be a function of geography. Besides the big sites, which are great if you are in a big city but not so hot if you are not, look at the niche sites; a common interest is probably more important then the best site.

 

While I was on e-harmony, DH was on Match so we had no shot at connecting electronically.

 

Meeting people IRL is always the best.

 

Remember OLD & apps are only tools. You need to search for your date in multiple ways.

 

I would suggest BUMBLE, too. Just to test the waters.

 

But most importantly, don't just sit in your house or desk waiting for interesting people to swipe right or send a message.

 

In the amount of time it takes to exchange five messages with one person on a dating app you could have had a nice conversation with 5 actual people in your daily life.

[Gloria25]

I can't speak for the female experience. But as a male, whenever I see someone on here "advise" a poster not to use _______ because it's a "hookup site", or to use _______ because it's a "dating site", I cringe.

 

I dated someone for a year and a half who I met on Tinder and I know Tinder couples. Tons of people use OK Cupid to hook up. It has little to do with which site you use. I mean, if you join "Swinging Iguana-Owners Only dot com" I guess you might be buying into a demographic. But the major dating services? Not really.

 

Second, thinking that OK Cupid is for dates and Tinder is for hookups is symptomatic of a greater issue - putting the cart before the horse. Attraction is attraction, and before people decide if they want to date you or hook up with you, they have to decide if they're attracted to you. These apps and sites are means for people to contact people they are attracted to. Again, I can't speak for women. But as a man, if you think a hookup and a relationship are that fundamentally different at the beginning, then you don't understand one, the other, or both.

 

I'm sorry, but IMO, a "hook-up" and a "relationship" are different. But really, the way people date now a days, if you ask me, they seem to treat a "relationship" with such fickle that the "relationships" they have are just endless "hook-ups" with someone they're just having "companionship" with until they're bored and/or it isn't convenient for them anymore.

 

A "hook-up" is just sex. You don't even have to be FBs, FWBs, and/or know each other that well. It's pretty much an ONS. Also, someone you're "hooking-up" with, isn't someone you see yourself with in the long run. Not gonna introduce them to your family/friends. Shoot, you might even be embarrassed if people find out you've been hooking up with them. You may not even spend the nite at their place and/or get their tel.

 

A "relationship" is different - even if it doesn't lead to marriage. This person you don't hide from the world. You walk down the street with them. Your friends/family will meet them at some point. It's not just sex. It's someone you're connecting with on a deeper level. You share beliefs, interests, activities, etc. with that person.

 

So yes, when I see Craigslist and/or Ashley Madison, of course I expect guys who are looking for sex and/or hook-ups who are probably married and/or involved with another person. So, I don't like it when these guys go on "dating" websites looking for hook-ups, especially when their profile doesn't state it. They create a profile making it look like they wanna "date" all the while they're married, involved with someone, and/or looking for a hook-up. Now, you can weed out some of the guys who really want hook-ups cuz their profile says something like "spontaneous", "fun", and/or they have the typical "shirtless" pics they take in the bathroom mirror.

 

Same thing if you meet a guy in a bar or club. More than likely he's looking for a hook-up. If you meet a guy in church, at a library, on the softball team - more than likely a "hook-up" isn't implied.

Edited April 15, 2016 by Gloria25

[deckard11]

What is your recommendation for the best OLD site for a mid-20's professional woman looking for a serious relationship?

 

From what I've read, Match and eHarmony are mentioned most, but was hoping for some real-world input.

 

Thanks!

 

Your best bet is probably a pay site like Match or Eharmony. Plenty of Fish and OK Cupid are trash.

[PegNosePete]

I didn't find the paid sites much good. Think about it.

 

Most people create a "trial" account to "view their matches for free" or whatever. The site makes most of their money from people signing on to their trial accounts and seeing "X messages waiting for you". Therefore it is in the site's interests for the paid-up members to be messaging trial members as much as possible. But the majority of those trial users will not sign up, therefore all those messages that the paid-up members send to trial members are wasted, and will never even be read, let alone get a response. Effectively the site encourages you to send messages to people who will mostly not reply. It's also not in the site's interests to tell you who is a paid-up member or not, because if you knew that in advance, who would bother to message a trial user that can't even read your message?

 

That is why your response rate on a paid site, is no better than your response rate on a free one. The often-quoted logic that "you'll get a higher response rate on a paid site because people pay to be there, they must be more serious" may be true, but it's more than out-weighed by the above problem: most of your messages go to unpaid members.

 

I stuck to free sites. POF was my preferred one because they give you a big blank canvas to use as creatively as you like. I didn't really like OKC whose question-driven profiles (6 favourite things, where are you on friday night etc) made everyone appear very similar and boring. I had no problem meeting people from POF, so, why pay for something I could get for free?

[LookAtThisPOst]

I didn't find the paid sites much good. Think about it.

 

Most people create a "trial" account to "view their matches for free" or whatever. The site makes most of their money from people signing on to their trial accounts and seeing "X messages waiting for you". Therefore it is in the site's interests for the paid-up members to be messaging trial members as much as possible. But the majority of those trial users will not sign up, therefore all those messages that the paid-up members send to trial members are wasted, and will never even be read, let alone get a response. Effectively the site encourages you to send messages to people who will mostly not reply. It's also not in the site's interests to tell you who is a paid-up member or not, because if you knew that in advance, who would bother to message a trial user that can't even read your message?

 

That is why your response rate on a paid site, is no better than your response rate on a free one. The often-quoted logic that "you'll get a higher response rate on a paid site because people pay to be there, they must be more serious" may be true, but it's more than out-weighed by the above problem: most of your messages go to unpaid members.

 

I stuck to free sites. POF was my preferred one because they give you a big blank canvas to use as creatively as you like. I didn't really like OKC whose question-driven profiles (6 favourite things, where are you on friday night etc) made everyone appear very similar and boring. I had no problem meeting people from POF, so, why pay for something I could get for free?

 

They say that the best you can do, is to keep an eye on those who have signed into the site most frequently. Like, "within the past 24 hrs", chances are they COULD be paid members...and the likelihood of them seeing/reading your message stands a better chance than let's say "last online 3 weeks".

 

Just a thought. :-)

 

I had no problem meeting people from POF, so, why pay for something I could get for free?

 

A male friend of mine said POF was kind of the 'bottom of the barrel" trailer trash quality types mostly. I heard the same from a few real life friends.

[BikerAccnt]

I've actually found paid sites to be the best ones honestly, Maybe it's because of my age group. But I find, with dating sites as in life, you get what you pay for. I've always managed more real dates from pay sites, than from the free ones. Too many people on free ones are just looking, interested in digital pen pals, or married.

[PegNosePete]

They say that the best you can do, is to keep an eye on those who have signed into the site most frequently. Like, "within the past 24 hrs", chances are they COULD be paid members...and the likelihood of them seeing/reading your message stands a better chance than let's say "last online 3 weeks".

I don't think that logic follows very well. If someone's been online in the past 24 hours, they could just as easily be a trial user who just created their account.

 

A male friend of mine said POF was kind of the 'bottom of the barrel"

Well Big Al says dogs can't look up.

 

Just because someone says it, doesn't mean it's true.

[d0nnivain]

The debate in this thread about who liked what site & why is actually further proof that there is no such thing as the BEST site.

 

 

Personally when I did it, I picked e-harmony because it was the most expensive site out there, that questionnaire was a p.i.t.a. & they didn't yet have the trial free communications weekends. I figured anybody who would go through all of that wanted something more then the ONS they could get from the local bar.

 

 

The few people I met (3 in 90 days) were quality guys. I can't say the site didn't deliver what I asked for in terms of the objective stuff -- education, employment, age, similar interests but that je ne c'est qua just wasn't there.

[TheWoman]

Ok cupid worked for me. They have something like 30,000 questions you can answer, and then you also have rate how important your answer was to you.

 

I was motivated to find someone who shared my values, so this was extremely useful. I answered nearly 1000 questions, choosing the ones that would reveal this kind of information about someone. And so did my SO, we kind of used it to get to know each other before we met. The kind of information that could take years to find out in a relationship.

 

I mean since then, I have discovered a few answers that were not the complete truth. But the overall picture of who he is as a person was spot on

[LookAtThisPOst]

Ok cupid worked for me. They have something like 30,000 questions you can answer, and then you also have rate how important your answer was to you.

 

I was motivated to find someone who shared my values, so this was extremely useful. I answered nearly 1000 questions, choosing the ones that would reveal this kind of information about someone. And so did my SO, we kind of used it to get to know each other before we met. The kind of information that could take years to find out in a relationship.

 

I mean since then, I have discovered a few answers that were not the complete truth. But the overall picture of who he is as a person was spot on

 

I would contact 98% even 99%s...mostly 95% and sometimes...I would even looked to see if they answered specific questions that were in alignment to my morals/values/beliefs, etc....only to be ignored.

 

I would use that as an opener to the email I would send them, "Hey, we're 99% matched, and from the looks to the answers to your questions, we seem to be pretty much in alignment."

 

And I would touch on some of those specifics in the initial email.

 

All I got was crickets/no response. *shrug* go figure.

 

That's why I don't put stock in OK Cupids silly question/answers survey, because if you don't look like a "hunk o burnin' love"to them, no matter how many questions you've answered...you'll be ignored. So now I don't care what percentage pops up, I'll email them regardless, mostly based on what they've written in their profile.

 

I was motivated to find someone who shared my values

 

You're values could be dead on, but if you're not 6 feet or taller, forget it. lol

[LookAtThisPOst]

I've actually found paid sites to be the best ones honestly, Maybe it's because of my age group. But I find, with dating sites as in life, you get what you pay for. I've always managed more real dates from pay sites, than from the free ones. Too many people on free ones are just looking, interested in digital pen pals, or married.

 

 

Yep, I've been ghosted by quite a few when I took the next step to meet. Pen-pals is all they wanted apparently.

[Mrin]

I personally had good luck on Match. But in your 20's OKC or Tinder (despite the hookup culture) might be where it's at.

 

I'll say this about eHarmony - a bunch of my female friends tried it and all hated it. Not sure if that's saying things about the service or my choice in friends.

 

Also - consider interest or lifestyle dating sites if you're into that. Christian Mingle etc...

[introverted1]

Meeting people IRL is always the best.

 

Agreed. But...

 

This is actually for my niece, who is a smart, ambitious girl in medical school. She's not a big partier and has what seem to be relatively old-fashioned values, so I was thinking she might do better online, especially since the time demands of school don't leave her many opportunities for meeting people IRL who aren't fellow students (or patients!).

[d0nnivain]

This is actually for my niece, who is a smart, ambitious girl in medical school. She's not a big partier and has what seem to be relatively old-fashioned values, so I was thinking she might do better online, especially since the time demands of school don't leave her many opportunities for meeting people IRL who aren't fellow students (or patients!).

 

What's wrong with meeting fellow students? Even if she doesn't want to date other med students does her school have other graduate programs?

 

Also just because she is not a partier, she should still go to the social events. She may find fellow not partiers in the periphery.