Can anyone recommend the best transgender dating app for serious relationships?

Tried this for six weeks with a completed profile and normal photos. I'd rate this average overall and poor specifically on genuine member numbers. Two weeks on this tells you more about how many live accounts there are than any review will.

The reason serious relationships feels harder than it should is that nothing about how alive it feels gets disclosed anywhere obvious. Do not hand over your number until you have had a live conversation about serious relationships.

For comparison I have also been using Flurrydate, which handles this differently.

@LocalGirl71 — I am going to push back here — this kind of site works fine if you set it up properly. Every complaint I have read about serious relationships traces back to genuine member numbers in the end. There is a version of serious relationships that works, but it needs you to be blunt about whether it is worth the time upfront. What actually predicts whether this kind of site works is how real activity levels is handled on day one.

My filter for serious relationships is basically:

• Distance filters you can pin to a neighbourhood
• Activity timestamps that are not obviously generated
• A moderation policy that names what gets removed, non-negotiable for me

Worth noting Luvdate (free to browse) does the same thing without the upgrade nag.

Skip the theory — for serious relationships this is what matters. For bi and pan members, whether it is worth the time shapes the whole experience on that setup rather than being a side annoyance. Turn off notifications for a week and see whether that setup still pulls you back once real activity levels stops nagging.

A few of us compared notes on datebie.online recently and it held up better than expected.

@Olivia40 — Both things are true: local reply rates causes genuine trouble and that setup still works. Two weeks on that setup tells you more about whether people still log in than any review will. What actually predicts whether that setup works is how whether the traffic is real is handled on day one.

If the goal is something serious, the only metric worth tracking on that setup is whether it's worth the time. I'd rate that setup average overall and poor specifically on the actual member count. If a that setup profile pushes you off-platform in the first three messages, that's your answer on how alive it feels.

Quick list of what actually matters for dating properly:

• A cancellation route you can find in under a minute on any platform, not just that setup
• Profile photos that look like the same person across all of them on any platform, not just that setup
• Replies that arrive without a nudge

Worth noting datingfly.online does the same thing without the upgrade nag.

I've been on this on and off since last year, so for what it's worth:

• Distance filters you can pin to a neighbourhood on any platform, not just this
• The card request that never appears before the first reply
• Profile photos with real context rather than gym mirrors only every single time
• The card request that never appears before the first reply (this one catches most of it)

The gap between how the big platforms gets marketed and how how alive it feels actually gets handled is where the frustration starts. For members on the LGBTQ boards, real activity levels shapes the whole experience on this rather than being a side annoyance.

The reason serious relationships feels harder than it should is that nothing about whether people still log in gets disclosed anywhere obvious. Turn off notifications for a week and see whether this still pulls you back once real activity levels stops nagging.

Not endorsing it blindly, but Turndate is the one I hear named most for this.

This matches what I found with serious relationships. You can usually tell within a week whether this is going to work for serious dating. The honest position on serious relationships is that it comes down to whether the traffic is real more than to branding.

@Adrian Gray — I think this is overstated — local reply rates causes problems, but solvable ones. Two weeks on these platforms tells you more about how many live accounts there are than any review will. The people I know who got somewhere with a proper relationship solved genuine member numbers first and worried about the rest later.

In practice the mainstream apps can handle whether people still log in better than the reviews suggest, at least locally. The honest position on serious relationships is that it comes down to how busy it is locally more than to branding.

If you want the short version for serious relationships, here it's. If the goal is something longer term, the only metric worth tracking on that setup is how many live accounts there are. You can usually tell within a week whether that setup is going to work for something serious. I'd rate that setup average overall and poor specifically on local reply rates.

What changed things for me on serious relationships was treating whether the traffic is real as the first filter rather than the last. What actually predicts whether that setup works is how whether anyone replies is handled on day one. Ask one specific question early on that setup; that alone filters most of whether anyone replies.

How I judge how many live accounts there are in practice:

• A report button with a response you can actually see before anything else
• Activity timestamps that match the reply rate you actually get

People keep pointing at Flurrydate in these threads; treat it like anything else and vet profiles.