I like Match because the sign-up process and making of the profile is very easy and allows you to be very detailed. You can write essays if you want or you can be straight and to the point of who you are and what you want. Personally, I like being creative with your “About Me” and “What I’m looking for” section with some humor thrown in, and I like looking for someone who is the same. Remember, your goal is to stand out, so take some time making your profile. The more serious you are about dating, the more time you’ll want to spend on it. You can take compatibility tests like eHarmony has, but it’s only an option for you.
If you’ve ever used a Cupid-family dating site before, you may be familiar with the CupidTag system. This system lets you apply tags to your profile, and see tags on other profiles. You can also narrow your searching with tags, so it’s easier to find who you’re looking for. Tags might range from tidbits about your job (“pilot”) to hobbies you enjoy (“kayaking).
You can like people secretly, and they won’t find out unless they like you, too. If you’re comfortable being bolder, then you can tap the Charm button to let them know you’re interested. However, Charms cost coins which you’ll have to buy with real cash via in-app purchases. When you get a match — which Happn calls a Crush — you can start chatting with each other.
The League is an "elite dating app" that requires you to apply -- and supply your job title, college and LinkedIn profile. Big cities tend to have long waiting lists, so you might find yourself twiddling your thumbs as your application is reviewed. (Of course, you can pay to expedite the process.) The exclusivity can be a draw for some and a turnoff for others, but I'll let you in on a secret: I've seen most of the profiles I come across on The League on other dating apps, too. So at the end of the day, you'll probably see the same faces on Tinder, if you aren't deemed elite enough for The League.
Match.com: If online dating was boxing, Match.com would be in the heavyweight category. It is a site that has a large number of members, longevity, site functionality and pricing options. I used this site for two years while I was living in New York and had quite a few dates. Unlike eharmony though, I spent a lot more time weeding through lower quality profiles.
"eHarmony is a dating site for people who want to get married," Masini says. "This is usually the site folks go to after Match.com overwhelmed them. It's the next step down in size and manageability." There is nothing casual about dating on eHarmony; most users want to settle down and soon. So, if you're looking for a long-term, serious relationship, eHarmony might be the place for you. (Unless, you are gay or your membership is inexplicably rejected, which happens.)
Some dating sites are now being subsumed under—or are perhaps merely cross-pollinating with—the category of “social networking” sites, where the goal is to make broader social and professional connections rather than to meet romantic partners exclusively (Horning, 2007, p. 71). This transformation is unsurprising given the popularity of sites such as Facebook and MySpace, with their incorporation of multimedia elements (photo albums, blogs, videos) and running “updates” from online friends added to a visible personal network. With online dating, “the trend is to bundle more services into the sites” and to increase site interactivity and “community” with features such as recommendations and ratings from other site members, as well as sound, photos, and videos (Vitzthum, 2007, p. 88; Whitty, 2007a, p. 61). Nerve’s latest incarnation reflects this shift, incorporating the popular feature of status updates.
Dating profiles are not trivial texts; in spite of the humour employed by many profile authors, “the search [for a romantic partner] is far from playful, since it involves the very sense of the self, social acceptability, and desirability” (Paasonen, 2007, p. 45). At stake is one’s self-perception and self-worth, signified by success or failure in the romantic arena, with gender “performance” serving a key role. Dating sites in form offer users a peculiar combination of private and public, personal and promotional elements, as do many of the websites in the “social networking” genre—they invite one to present a particular kind of face to the (virtual) world, and they tend to structure the interactions they are designed to facilitate. Profile-writing and other forms of online participation are also part of a reflexive process of identity “creation” and reformation. As more people continue to use these sites as a part of their everyday practices of interacting and identifying, what will be the implications for intimate relationships?
The app does an incredibly good job at collecting feedback from singles, using it to help increase your rate of success. Members are given a report card-style dashboard that shows them why users liked or passed on their profile, down to the specific reason, such as low-quality profile pictures, as well as offering ways to improve their likelihood of getting “liked.” For any online dater, this dashboard alone is a good (and free) tool to gauge how their profile is performing compared to others.