Messages that work for online dating
But almost all of them were suspiciously short, spammy, or just plain rude.Zoosk took it one step further — you’ll pay a monthly subscription for low-quality matches.It organizes in-person events like speed dating, happy hours, and game nights for its members to help accelerate the search for “the one,” and it works — studies have shown it’s one of the top two sites to produce marriages.(Match.com’s user base is slightly older, too, which may indicate more people who are ready to settle down.) However, Match lacks the robust matching algorithm of Ok Cupid — it came in fourth place for good matches in our testing — and isn’t as streamlined as Tinder or Bumble. We also tested three other sites: e Harmony, Plenty of Fish, and Zoosk.
Meanwhile, Plenty of Fish lives up to its name — we received twice as many messages compared to Ok Cupid.Even though we received fewer messages compared to other sites, we rated 40 percent “good” — the most out of the seven sites we tested.That’s in large part because only mutual matches can message each other: both parties have to “swipe right” before they can say hello, which cuts way down on spam.Since our tester was a straight woman, her experience with online dating is weighted more toward receiving messages than sending messages.
(According to a study from Ok Cupid, the majority of women don’t send the first message in online dating conversations — but they get great results when they do.) To keep our judgments as objective as possible, we used a rubric to categorize each message: Unfortunately — but perhaps not all that surprisingly — the majority of the messages we received on traditional dating sites were mediocre or downright bad. To send someone a message, both users have to indicate they’re interested by “swiping right” on their profile.
We tested any with at least a million active users in the US.