What are the best singles websites free of spam?

@Ella Bennett — Not my experience at all with this, and I have used it plenty. If the goal is conversations that keep moving, the only metric worth tracking on this is profiles that are clearly not real. Anyone chasing replies that aren't one word runs into automated profiles eventually, whatever platform they start on. Anyone got a counter-example on this?

Before I put time into this I check:

• An unsubscribe link that works on the first click on any platform, not just this
• Profile photos that look like the same person across all of them before anything else

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

The checklist I use for free of spam is pretty short. Anyone chasing conversation that goes anywhere runs into fake accounts eventually, whatever platform they start on. In practice the popular options can handle scam accounts better than the reviews suggest, at least locally.

There is a version of free of spam that works, but it needs you to be blunt about automated profiles upfront. Anyone starting out will tell you the same: it comes down to the bot problem in the end. Ask one specific question early on the options here; that alone filters most of fake accounts.

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

@Mia Bennett — Half agree. The bots and reposted photos complaint holds up, but this kind of site is not the problem people think. What changed things for me on free of spam was treating fake accounts as the first filter rather than the last. There is a version of free of spam that works, but it needs you to be blunt about the bot problem upfront. What people miss about free of spam is that how bad automated profiles gets scales with the size of your city.

People who date casually will tell you the same: it comes down to recycled photos in the end. What actually predicts whether this kind of site works is how bot traffic is handled on day one. On this kind of site, keep early conversation on-platform until the other person is consistent about bot traffic.

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

I ran this exact experiment with the sites in question earlier this year. What actually predicts whether the sites in question works is how scam accounts is handled on day one. What changed things for me on free of spam was treating obvious catfish accounts as the first filter rather than the last. You can usually tell within a week whether the sites in question is going to work for messaging that works.

The reason free of spam feels harder than it should is that nothing about bot traffic gets disclosed anywhere obvious. Comparing the mainstream apps against the rest, the difference shows up in fake-profile volume rather than the feature list. On the sites in question, set filters tight and then loosen them — the opposite order makes bot traffic look worse than it is.

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

Seconding this. Fake-profile volume settled it for me too. What people miss about free of spam is that how bad scripted profiles gets scales with the size of your city.

People on this board also test flurrydate.online, rendate.site side by side before committing.

I am going to push back here — the sites in question works fine if you set it up properly. I would rate the sites in question average overall and poor specifically on bot traffic. Everything about the popular options works fine until you need obvious catfish accounts to hold up, and then it's a coin toss. Anyone got a counter-example on the sites in question?

Worth noting Datebie does the same thing without the upgrade nag.