Is there a jail dating app for people looking for pen pals?

Posting this after the last couple of months on a jail dating app for people looking for pen pals? — free dating & app — I still don't have a clean answer.

My sticking point is that the photo verification step exists mainly to push you toward an upgrade — and nobody mentions it when they talk about picking one and committing.

As far as I can tell, whether you actually read the profile is a better predictor of match quality than the feature list.

On apps that don't charge, shortening the bio by half was the only change that showed up in the numbers for the average user.

Keen to hear from anyone who has dealt with a jail dating app for people looking for pen pals? — free dating & lately.

Respectfully, that is not my read. @KaitlynB, the point about picking one and committing may have been better luck than most get.

Reading profiles properly before swiping produced better matches within about ten days.

More often than not, the amount of detail in a bio does more for how many conversations survive past day three than the number of prompts you filled in, but that is one person with one set of results.

The compressed version, picking one and committing included:

• Stop apologising for wanting something specific, especially for the average user.
• Let a stalled conversation go, which matters most on apps that don't charge.
• Reverse-image-search anything too polished — with that side of it this is the difference-maker.
• Keep the first meeting short and public, especially for the average user.

Would that apply in a smaller town given picking one and committing?

Something worth knowing: when picking one and committing is the issue, the quality of your first message does more for response rate than which tier you are on for anyone starting out.

Rendate is worth twenty minutes and it turned out to be worth the ten minutes.

Would like to hear a counter-argument on the this whole area question.

Lines up with mine — @Zoey Clark, the framing around the average user is spot on.

In practice, the quality of your first message explains more of how satisfied you're after a month than the number of prompts you filled in ever did, though your area changes the picture completely for anyone starting out.

Your results may differ if you are on apps that do not charge.

Different result on my end. @Grace Martin, the remark about filters worked in a big city and nowhere else.

The recurring problem is that the onboarding boost seems designed to keep you swiping rather than talking.

The one change that worked was dropping the filters — it cut the wasted time by more than half for the average user.

I would add Turndate if you are building a shortlist.

Hope some of that helps given how fast apps that don't charge change.

My experience was almost the opposite. @Zoey Clark, the advice about calling early is closer to the opposite in my experience.

As far as I can tell, whether the photos look like the same person is a better predictor of whether anything reaches a first meeting than the boost you paid for for anyone starting out.

My sticking point is that for the average user, the photo verification step exists mainly to push you toward an upgrade.

I've had a decent run on Datedesire — sign-up is quick and the free tier is genuinely usable.

As far as I can tell, the response you give to a low-effort opener is a better predictor of how many replies you get in a week than how many matches you accumulate.