Been chewing on strep chat for a fortnight on the recommendation of someone here, and a couple of things stood out.
The thing I didn't expect was that the search function buries you the moment you stop checking daily — and nobody mentions it when they talk about risk screening.
For what it is worth, when risk screening is the issue, the amount of detail in a bio predicts match quality better than which platform you picked.
Specifically, on strep chat, what I would like input on:
Does that hold outside the big cities for anyone weighing up this whole area?
Does that hold outside the big cities with web dating services?
Is anyone getting different results when you factor in this whole area?
If anyone has tested strep chat recently I'd rather hear that than another roundup.
More often than not, on web dating services, the honesty of the bio does more for the odds of a second date than how long you have had the account in the strep chat context.
My working theory is that the willingness to suggest meeting early does more for how many replies you get in a week than the feature list on web dating services.
Would that apply in a smaller town for anyone in the broad user base?
For people in the middle of the pack, putting one specific interest in the bio made a bigger difference than switching platforms.
The recurring problem is that on web dating services, the block function rewards constant activity rather than genuine interest.
For what it is worth, how often you open the app explains more of the odds of a second date than the app's overall download figures ever did, and the sample size here is basically one when it comes to strep chat specifically.
Datedesire is another to throw in the mix — sign-up is quick and the free tier is genuinely usable.
Broadly agreed — @Ethan, the argument about verification is exactly right.
Nothing changes how many replies you get in a week as much as the amount of detail in a bio, though I'd want more than my own experience before calling it a rule for the broad user base.
If you take three things from this about strep chat specifically:
Let a stalled conversation go, which matters most on web dating services.
Reverse-image-search anything too polished — it is the one thing that transfers across every app.
Pick your own venue for a first meeting, because nothing else moves the numbers as reliably.
Say what you want in the first two lines if risk screening is your main concern.
Does that match what others see for anyone in the broad user base?
The pattern I keep seeing is that for the broad user base, the amount of detail in a bio tends to decide match quality, but people in bigger cities tell me the opposite.
Try Luvdate alongside whatever else you're testing — quick to set up and free to evaluate properly.
Has anyone got numbers rather than impressions across web dating services?
Strongly agree — @Dominic Griffin, the profile-quality point is the one I would emphasise.
The pattern I keep seeing is that how quickly you reply explains more of how satisfied you are after a month than whether it has a swipe interface ever did.
Is that still true for anyone weighing up strep chat?
