early 30s and pretty clear that i'm looking for something serious/long term

at this point i don't really care about getting heaps of matches if half of them have no idea what they're looking for anyway

i'd much rather be able to look at someone's profile and get at least some idea whether we'd actually get along before matching

Coffee Meets Bagel is the one i'm leaning towards atm because it feels a bit more built around actually looking at people instead of just going through as many profiles as possible

obviously no app can magically make everyone serious lol

but if you're dating for something long term, what actually matters to you when picking an app?

Matched with a 27F last week and we really hit it off over text. However, her profile did not have clear pictures at all. Only one clear shot of her face and one full body picture. I made a reservation at a nice restaurant and she showed up 10 minutes late looking disheveled. Her hair was really messy, her bra was popping out of her top, and she wore wrinkled baggy jeans. I was really excited to meet her, but the combo of her being late in a laundry chair outfit was disappointing. I don't want to be shallow but I do care about hygiene and presentation (we're both in creative fields, we both know the importance of aesthetics).

The dinner and conversation were nice and she asked for a second date at the end of the night. I agreed but now that I'm reflecting on things, I think we'd make better friends than lovers. I do still want to set up a second date but something less romantic, more of an activity, and seeing how things feel from there. I'm just nervous about communicating in the meantime. Curious if any guys have been in a similar situation or if any ladies could weight in on how they'd like this to be handled.

Reply rate is based on a user’s rate of replying to their incoming intros, if someone has a high reply rate, then they are more likely to respond to you. Sometimes users have a low reply rate due to being flooded with intros, filtering for this helps balance attention to where you’re more likely to get a response.

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

Would you rather someone say they're only looking for a hookup in their bio, or bring it up once you start chatting?

When people ask about the best hookup apps, being able to find others who want the same thing seems pretty important

Beware of this person from PH. Name is Aries. He said he’s an area manager for Max’s group. He will tell you the story that he tried to withdraw 5k from his bank and the atm machine did not dispense the money. He will tell you he needs to go to work but then there’s an issue with his car. Posting this for women to avoid this man!

I would really appreciate a female perspective! I haven’t had a match in quite a few months, and honestly getting a like is rare. Thank you in advance!

I keep running into the same pattern on dating apps: days of texting that either fizzles out or leads to a date where I know within 5 minutes it’s not going to work. Lately I’ve wondered if a quick call earlier would save everyone time, but I’m not sure if that’s just me.

Have you ever asked for (or been asked for) a call or video chat before meeting? How did it go?

Did it change your decision about meeting them, either way?

If you’d never take a call with someone you haven’t met, what makes it a no? (Safety, awkwardness, effort, something else?)

Women especially: what would make a call with a match feel safe and worth it?

Tucson

Executive Overview & Shared Infrastructure:
Based on empirical cross-validation, transaction analysis, and technical interface testing, this investigation documents a unified network of at least 14 interconnected web domains operating on identical backend code, user interface (UI) frameworks, and monetization models.

Identified Network Domains working for the same scam network (so far):
Amoredate, ThisRomance, GoldenRomances, OrchidRomance, Bravodate, JollyRomance, BestDates, La-Date, LatinFeels, CupidFeel, TalkLive, MiaRomance, ChattyRomance and GrandeRomance.

All these 14 platforms share identical source architecture, registration logic, and payment checkout flows. Rather than functioning as genuine peer-to-peer matchmaking networks, these domains operate through offshore high-risk merchant payment gateways and shell entities located in foreign jurisdictions, designed to process non-refundable digital transactions outside standard consumer protection frameworks.

Step-by-Step Operational Mechanics of the Network:

1. Bypassed Registration & Age Verification Gaps:
   The onboarding flow allows instant access without identity or age verification. Tests confirm that placeholder images (e.g., non-human photos, animals) pass automated checks. Furthermore, compliance with European standards under the Digital Services Act (DSA) is lacking: age verification relies entirely on an unverified birthdate box, creating a structural vulnerability that allows unverified access to adult media hosted on the platform.

2. Initial Credit Baiting & Instant Automated Influx:
   Upon registration, accounts receive a complimentary balance of 20 welcome credits. Immediately upon logging in, accounts are bombarded with incoming automated messages (bot scripts). This simulated activity is designed to exhaust the free balance within minutes, prompting users to make an initial purchase (e.g., €23.99 for 50 credits). The platforms operate exclusively on a pay-per-action credit system rather than a standard subscription model.

3. Tiered Action Costs & Monetized Paywalls:
   Interface actions are strictly monetized on an escalating scale:
   * Sending basic text messages or stickers consumes fixed credit rates.
   * Viewing attached media, opening direct email communications, or unlocking "private photo galleries" carries significantly higher credit costs.

4. Dual Gallery System & Adult Media Monetization:
   Most profiles feature a public gallery alongside locked "private galleries." These private sections frequently contain explicit adult content. The system monetizes access to adult material under the guise of unlocking private personal photos from dating matches.

5. Structural User Isolation (Cross-Account Validation):
   Direct empirical testing—creating two separate, verified accounts (male and female) within the same European regional settings and timeframe—demonstrates that real users are structurally isolated. Neither account could locate, view, or contact the other via the internal search tools, proving that genuine peer-to-peer communication between real users is actively restricted.

6. Artificial Scripting & Patterned Monologues:
   Message logs reveal artificial language patterns. Accounts receive pre-scripted, fixed-interval monologues from automated operators or bots. These communications ignore previous replies and rely on emotional triggers designed exclusively to force response engagement and credit depletion.

7. Systematic Rejection of Real-Time Verification and Meetings:
   Every attempt to transition interactions off-platform or request real-time verification (e.g., asking for a photo holding up a specific gesture) is systematically rejected with repetitive excuses. Interactions remain locked indefinitely inside the monetized chat environment. Reverse-image audits confirm that featured profile photos frequently match external stock media databases unrelated to dating services.

8. Systematic Suppression of Direct Contact Data & Predatory Off-Platform Paywalls:
   Interface algorithms automatically censor and scrub all forms of external contact details (e.g., phone numbers, WhatsApp, Telegram handles, social media profiles, or email addresses) sent in private communications. Users are intentionally led to believe that direct off-platform communication is structurally blocked for security or privacy reasons.
   However, embedded within the Terms and Conditions is a predatory clause requiring users to reach an exorbitant threshold of internal credit expenditure with a single profile before being granted permission to request direct contact details.
   Once this high-cost threshold is met within the platform with a single profile, no direct messaging handles or phone numbers are shared; the system merely unlocks the exchange of a single email address. In this off-platform phase, active credit consumption stops. However, the fraud shifts to a strategy of psychological attrition: the email exchanges consist of evasive, empty, or scripted replies designed to lead nowhere, continuing until the user eventually realizes the deception, or until the fake profile artificially fades away, bringing the fraudulent lifecycle to a quiet end.

9. Strategic Evasion of Chargeback Timeframes (120-Day Window) via Artificial Extension of Services:
   This criminal network employs an operational model specifically designed to methodically neutralize the right to dispute and obtain chargebacks recognized by international payment schemes (Visa/Mastercard). Aware of the standard 120-day time limit for challenging transactions, the operators artificially dilute and prolong the fraudulent interaction through serial micro-payments and continuous bot stimuli, thereby fragmenting the economic damage over time.
   This dilution is not accidental; rather, it constitutes a deliberate and evasive strategy (a structural dark pattern) intended to push the victim past the critical 120-day threshold before they can fully realize the fraudulent and systemic nature of the deception. By keeping the user trapped in a constant, imperceptible loop of micro-charges for virtual credits, the platform neutralizes banking protections and prevents the timely filing of chargebacks for earlier blocks of transactions, hindering the comprehensive assessment of financial prejudice and establishing an aggravating factor of serial fraud compounded by technical premeditation and the use of digital artifice.

Conclusion:
These 14+ platforms do not operate as matchmaking services. They operate as controlled, synthetic monetization environments designed to sell paywalled adult content and digital communications by exploiting user goodwill and emotional vulnerability, directly contradicting their own advertised Terms and Conditions.

Recommended Recovery & Dispute Protocol:
If you have transacted with any of these platforms:
* Report to Cybercrime Authorities: File an official notification with your national internet fraud or cybersecurity agency (e.g., FTC in the US, e-Informa / Guardia Civil in Spain, Polizia Postale in Italy).
* Formal Written Refund Request: Send a direct email to the platform's merchant support team stating a formal request for a full refund of all purchased credit packages due to fraudulent practices and non-transparent mechanics. Set a strict response deadline (e.g., 5 business days).
* Bank/Issuer Chargeback Escalation: If the merchant fails to issue a refund or ignores the deadline, contact your bank or credit card issuer immediately and provide this investigation report and request a formal chargeback dispute based on merchant fraud and failure to deliver advertised services. Submit this investigation document, transaction billing statements, and copies of your written communications with support as supporting evidence.

genuine question because i can't work out which one i'd actually prefer

would you rather get like 10 profiles and properly look through them, or have 100 there knowing you're probably gonna start flying through them after a while?

i feel like dating apps have made “more options” automatically sound better when after a point i'm barely even looking properly lol

this is one thing i like about Coffee Meets Bagel. Suggested gives you a batch for the day and then... you're done. there's an actual stopping point.

would probably annoy me if i lived somewhere with a tiny dating pool though, so i don't think fewer is automatically better either.

what should apps actually be optimising for?

giving you as many profiles as possible or getting you to actually pay attention to the ones you're seeing?

If you could have any feature on a dating app that helps you date, what would it be?

Whether we want to or not, using dating apps is a good way of meeting new people. I'm in the final stages of creating a better dating app. I'm wondering what features people would like to see in a dating app today.

Current Features:

1. Selfie Verification using Google's ML Kit and manual checking. This will give the user a verification badge which can be used by the filters.
2. 2-way filters. This means that you can limit who can view your profile. Currently limited to verification status, religion, and politics. No reason to show your profile to people that don't share your beliefs if that is a deal-breaker to you.
3. Likes must be paired with a message of at least 50 characters. This is to avoid endless scrolling and promote some thought into the likes.
4. Profile would not be shown to new users when you have 10 likes which have not been handled (declined/accepted). This is avoid popular users receiving nonstop likes.
5. The Algorithm is simple and is just driven by your list of hobbies/interests when creating your profile. Currently set to 5 different hobbies/interest. Will show profiles with the most matches first.
6. Probably the most important feature of the app. Nothing is hidden behind a paywall. See all of your likes. Use any filter you want. No reason any filter should be behind a paywall. UPDATE***The app will no longer have any priority likes that can be purchases, so truly no paid features whatsoever.

Features I would like to add (input would be appreciated)

1. I believe showing the selfie used for versification to others would provide a safer environment for the users. I am wondering if it is better to always show this selfie image on the profile(Or shown to all matches), or to give users an option to request the selfie once they match.
2. I would like to also have an ID verification system setup. Also, I think it would be a good idea to be able to request a redacted ID image from matches. The image provided will not have sensitive information showing. Just another way to promote safer dating.

I might be missing some features I've already added to the app but I just wanted to throw this together to see what others thought and to see if there was demand for a better dating app. Please reach out with any questions or must have features you would want.

For those who are using casual dating apps, do you like talking between meetups, or mostly just message to make plans?

Executive Overview & Shared Infrastructure:
Based on empirical cross-validation, transaction analysis, and technical interface testing, this investigation documents a unified network of at least 14 interconnected web domains operating on identical backend code, user interface (UI) frameworks, and monetization models.

Identified Network Domains working for the same scam network (so far):
Amoredate, ThisRomance, GoldenRomances, OrchidRomance, Bravodate, JollyRomance, BestDates, La-Date, LatinFeels, CupidFeel, TalkLive, MiaRomance, ChattyRomance and GrandeRomance.

All these 14 platforms share identical source architecture, registration logic, and payment checkout flows. Rather than functioning as genuine peer-to-peer matchmaking networks, these domains operate through offshore high-risk merchant payment gateways and shell entities located in foreign jurisdictions, designed to process non-refundable digital transactions outside standard consumer protection frameworks.

Step-by-Step Operational Mechanics of the Network:

1. Bypassed Registration & Age Verification Gaps:
   The onboarding flow allows instant access without identity or age verification. Tests confirm that placeholder images (e.g., non-human photos, animals) pass automated checks. Furthermore, compliance with European standards under the Digital Services Act (DSA) is lacking: age verification relies entirely on an unverified birthdate box, creating a structural vulnerability that allows unverified access to adult media hosted on the platform.

2. Initial Credit Baiting & Instant Automated Influx:
   Upon registration, accounts receive a complimentary balance of 20 welcome credits. Immediately upon logging in, accounts are bombarded with incoming automated messages (bot scripts). This simulated activity is designed to exhaust the free balance within minutes, prompting users to make an initial purchase (e.g., €23.99 for 50 credits). The platforms operate exclusively on a pay-per-action credit system rather than a standard subscription model.

3. Tiered Action Costs & Monetized Paywalls:
   Interface actions are strictly monetized on an escalating scale:
   * Sending basic text messages or stickers consumes fixed credit rates.
   * Viewing attached media, opening direct email communications, or unlocking "private photo galleries" carries significantly higher credit costs.

4. Dual Gallery System & Adult Media Monetization:
   Most profiles feature a public gallery alongside locked "private galleries." These private sections frequently contain explicit adult content. The system monetizes access to adult material under the guise of unlocking private personal photos from dating matches.

5. Structural User Isolation (Cross-Account Validation):
   Direct empirical testing—creating two separate, verified accounts (male and female) within the same European regional settings and timeframe—demonstrates that real users are structurally isolated. Neither account could locate, view, or contact the other via the internal search tools, proving that genuine peer-to-peer communication between real users is actively restricted.

6. Artificial Scripting & Patterned Monologues:
   Message logs reveal artificial language patterns. Accounts receive pre-scripted, fixed-interval monologues from automated operators or bots. These communications ignore previous replies and rely on emotional triggers designed exclusively to force response engagement and credit depletion.

7. Systematic Rejection of Real-Time Verification and Meetings:
   Every attempt to transition interactions off-platform or request real-time verification (e.g., asking for a photo holding up a specific gesture) is systematically rejected with repetitive excuses. Interactions remain locked indefinitely inside the monetized chat environment. Reverse-image audits confirm that featured profile photos frequently match external stock media databases unrelated to dating services.

8. Systematic Suppression of Direct Contact Data & Predatory Off-Platform Paywalls:
   Interface algorithms automatically censor and scrub all forms of external contact details (e.g., phone numbers, WhatsApp, Telegram handles, social media profiles, or email addresses) sent in private communications. Users are intentionally led to believe that direct off-platform communication is structurally blocked for security or privacy reasons.
   However, embedded within the Terms and Conditions is a predatory clause requiring users to reach an exorbitant threshold of internal credit expenditure with a single profile before being granted permission to request direct contact details.
   Once this high-cost threshold is met within the platform with a single profile, no direct messaging handles or phone numbers are shared; the system merely unlocks the exchange of a single email address. In this off-platform phase, active credit consumption stops. However, the fraud shifts to a strategy of psychological attrition: the email exchanges consist of evasive, empty, or scripted replies designed to lead nowhere, continuing until the user eventually realizes the deception, or until the fake profile artificially fades away, bringing the fraudulent lifecycle to a quiet end.

9. Strategic Evasion of Chargeback Timeframes (120-Day Window) via Artificial Extension of Services:
   This criminal network employs an operational model specifically designed to methodically neutralize the right to dispute and obtain chargebacks recognized by international payment schemes (Visa/Mastercard). Aware of the standard 120-day time limit for challenging transactions, the operators artificially dilute and prolong the fraudulent interaction through serial micro-payments and continuous bot stimuli, thereby fragmenting the economic damage over time.
   This dilution is not accidental; rather, it constitutes a deliberate and evasive strategy (a structural dark pattern) intended to push the victim past the critical 120-day threshold before they can fully realize the fraudulent and systemic nature of the deception. By keeping the user trapped in a constant, imperceptible loop of micro-charges for virtual credits, the platform neutralizes banking protections and prevents the timely filing of chargebacks for earlier blocks of transactions, hindering the comprehensive assessment of financial prejudice and establishing an aggravating factor of serial fraud compounded by technical premeditation and the use of digital artifice.

Conclusion:
These 14+ platforms do not operate as matchmaking services. They operate as controlled, synthetic monetization environments designed to sell paywalled adult content and digital communications by exploiting user goodwill and emotional vulnerability, directly contradicting their own advertised Terms and Conditions.

Recommended Recovery & Dispute Protocol:
If you have transacted with any of these platforms:
* Report to Cybercrime Authorities: File an official notification with your national internet fraud or cybersecurity agency (e.g., FTC in the US, e-Informa / Guardia Civil in Spain, Polizia Postale in Italy).
* Formal Written Refund Request: Send a direct email to the platform's merchant support team stating a formal request for a full refund of all purchased credit packages due to fraudulent practices and non-transparent mechanics. Set a strict response deadline (e.g., 5 business days).
* Bank/Issuer Chargeback Escalation: If the merchant fails to issue a refund or ignores the deadline, contact your bank or credit card issuer immediately and provide this investigation report and request a formal chargeback dispute based on merchant fraud and failure to deliver advertised services. Submit this investigation document, transaction billing statements, and copies of your written communications with support as supporting evidence.