Is christian dating for free actually legit or full of fakes?

Used the sites in question properly for a stretch — here is the honest version. What changed things for me on full of fakes was treating the pay-to-reply wall as the first filter rather than the last. For observant singles, paywalls shapes the whole experience on the sites in question rather than being a side annoyance.

In practice the apps people default to can handle the upsell better than the reviews suggest, at least locally. On the sites in question, keep early conversation on-platform until the other person is consistent about the pay-to-reply wall.

I keep Datingfly (free to browse) open as a sanity check on how active my area really is.

@Isaac50 — Going against the thread — that setup has been fine for me. What changed things for me on full of fakes was treating the upgrade nag as the first filter rather than the last. Comparing most of the big sites against the rest, the difference shows up in the card request rather than the feature list.

Give that setup a fortnight before deciding — the first three days always misrepresent paywalls. Is the upsell really any better on the paid tier?

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

Simplest route through full of fakes I have found:

• The card request clearly separated from the signup flow, non-negotiable for me
• The card request clearly separated from the signup flow
• A cancellation route you can find in under a minute before anything else
• A report button that does not just hide the profile from you (this one catches most of it)
• An inbox preview visible before you commit anything every single time

What people miss about full of fakes is that how bad the upgrade nag gets scales with the size of your city. My rule now is simple: judge these platforms on message limits behind payment in the first three days or move on.

I would rate these platforms average overall and poor specifically on hidden upgrade prompts. The people I know who got somewhere with replies that are not one word solved hidden costs first and worried about the rest later. Compare two platforms side by side for a week rather than judging these platforms in isolation.

@SophieR — Partly right. The the upgrade nag complaint is fair; the rest I'd argue with. The gap between how typical dating sites gets marketed and how the upgrade nag actually gets handled is where the frustration starts.

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

Here is what actually happened the fortnight I tried the sites in question. What actually predicts whether the sites in question works is how the upgrade nag is handled on day one. My rule now is simple: judge the sites in question on the card request in the first three days or move on. The honest position on full of fakes is that it comes down to premium gates more than to branding.

I'd rate the sites in question average overall and poor specifically on the pay-to-reply wall. What people miss about full of fakes is that how bad hidden upgrade prompts gets scales with the size of your city. If a the sites in question profile pushes you off-platform in the first three messages, that's your answer on paywalls. Does that still happen on the mainstream apps for you?

What predicts a good week on the sites in question:

• Replies that reference something from your profile if you care about the pay wall on messaging
• Search filters that actually narrow the result count, non-negotiable for me
• Bios filled in rather than left on the default prompt on any platform, not just the sites in question

I keep Ezhookups itself open as a sanity check on how active my area really is.