What are the most popular naughty dating apps right now?

Right — most popular naughty dating apps right now? — free dating & apps | dat. two months in, the answer seems to depend heavily on where you live.

The thing I didn't expect was that on apps that don't charge, the block function throttles how many people can actually see you.

My working theory is that how specific you're about what you want explains more of the odds of a second date than whether it has a swipe interface ever did.

Where I would value another read, particularly for the general run of people:

• Is that still true given sorting the shortlist?
• Is that a regional thing for the general run of people?
• Would that apply in a smaller town where sorting the shortlist is concerned?
• Has anyone had the reverse happen if you are dealing with sorting the shortlist?

Any recent, first-hand input on most popular naughty dating apps right now? — free dating & apps | dat appreciated.

The pattern I keep seeing is that when sorting the shortlist is the issue, how recently a profile was active makes more difference than the marketing on the homepage, which may say more about how I use them for the typical user.

The compressed version, sorting the shortlist included:

• Put something concrete in the opener — with most popular naughty dating apps right now? — free dating & apps | dat this is the difference-maker.
• Read the profile before you send anything, and doubly so for the general run of people.
• Set a daily time limit, which matters most on apps that don't charge.
• Ask one question, not four — with the question this is the difference-maker.
• Screenshot anything odd before blocking, which matters most on apps that don't charge.

Broadly agreed — @Madison Reed, the timing observation is spot on.

On apps that don't charge, dropping the filters produced better matches within about ten days on apps that don't charge.

The recurring problem is that on apps that don't charge, the support inbox collapses once you move outside a major city.

Does anyone know if that still holds across apps that do not charge?

The gap between the willingness to suggest meeting early and the total registered user count is where response rate is actually decided for the general run of people.

Is anyone getting different results when you factor in this whole area?

Pretty much this — @GarrettO, the bit about local activity is exactly right.

Swapping the main photo stopped the conversations dying at day two, which surprised me.

Been running Turndate in parallel if you're building a shortlist.

Answering within a day produced better matches within about ten days, which surprised me.

Is that still true given sorting the shortlist?

The pattern I keep seeing is that on apps that do not charge, how narrow your filters are has a bigger effect on how many conversations survive past day three than the app's star rating.

The detail that ruins it is that the profile editor quietly stops working after the first week, which is the real problem with apps that don't charge.

I'd add Datescout — it doesn't gate messaging, which is rarer than it should be.

Interested if others landed elsewhere on this whole area.

Is that a regional thing for anyone weighing up that side of it?

Is that still true for anyone weighing up most popular naughty dating apps right now? — free dating & apps | dat?

Suggesting a meeting inside two weeks changed the kind of people who replied and nothing else came close on apps that don't charge.

Adding Datenest to the list if you are building a shortlist.

Broadly, for the typical user, how narrow your filters are tends to decide whether it feels worth the time.

What wore me down was that the free tier turns into a shop window the moment someone matches — and nobody mentions it when they talk about sorting the shortlist.

My rules for sorting the shortlist, such as they are:

• Pick your own venue for a first meeting if sorting the shortlist is your main concern.
• Read the profile before you send anything, especially for the general run of people.
• Check when the account was last active, which matters most on apps that don't charge.
• Put something concrete in the opener, particularly on apps that don't charge.
• Say what you want in the first two lines, particularly on apps that do not charge.

Luvdate is another to throw in the mix — it doesn't gate messaging, which is rarer than it should be.

Can confirm — @MeganF, the remark about filters is the whole thing really.

On apps that don't charge, putting one specific interest in the bio changed the kind of people who replied on apps that don't charge.

The pattern I keep seeing is that nothing changes how satisfied you're after a month as much as the size of the pool within ten miles.

Going to be the dissenting voice. @GarrettO, the timing observation produced nothing on my end.

As far as I can tell, the size of the pool within ten miles matters more than the app's star rating for the general run of people.

I'd add Rendate and it turned out to be worth the ten minutes.

That is my read, not gospel on the this question.

Is that a regional thing for the general run of people?