Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tinder is the biggest and arguably the best place for hookups. This isn’t that surprising. I’d say if you just want a leg over you’re better off there than anywhere else. " This is true, shame about the bots though | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Blimey. Is that half of the two thirds or half of all users?" Can I post a link? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tinder is the biggest and arguably the best place for hookups. This isn’t that surprising. I’d say if you just want a leg over you’re better off there than anywhere else. " Guess it varies greatly from person to person! I joined Tinder before I joined Fab, I've only ever had one match meet me from Tinder (social meet) she was not impressed that I was seeking hookups and never spoke since. All those who've matched with me subsequently also want serious relationships and ghost the second I admit otherwise. I've had much more fun via fab in the last 3 years, let's put it that way! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Since when was tinder last about casual sex? I couldn't get laid if I'd been locked in a brothel and the lights were off." 'No ONS’ on 80%+ female profiles.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Since when was tinder last about casual sex? I couldn't get laid if I'd been locked in a brothel and the lights were off. 'No ONS’ on 80%+ female profiles. "And some 60+% of those specifying no ONS are exactly looking for that. But for all sorts of reasons say the opposite. The biggest difference between fab and tinder is women here are generally more explicit about what they're looking for. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes it’s mostly used for casual sex People can hide behind it’s a date site less judgement Than they on a swingers site or as some think a sex site Mostly if friends or relatives or people they know see them on it they can cover with I looking for love a date Instead off I am getting around everyone Normal closed minded thinking to be honest Instead off being open minded and telling the jugmenit people to take a fly fuck to them self exuse the language it’s not very often I use it " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm on Tinder, so are my five girlfiends "No one likes a show off  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes it’s mostly used for casual sex People can hide behind it’s a date site less judgement Than they on a swingers site or as some think a sex site Mostly if friends or relatives or people they know see them on it they can cover with I looking for love a date Instead off I am getting around everyone Normal closed minded thinking to be honest Instead off being open minded and telling the jugmenit people to take a fly fuck to them self exuse the language it’s not very often I use it "Thanks you   | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tinder is the biggest and arguably the best place for hookups. This isn’t that surprising. I’d say if you just want a leg over you’re better off there than anywhere else. Guess it varies greatly from person to person! I joined Tinder before I joined Fab, I've only ever had one match meet me from Tinder (social meet) she was not impressed that I was seeking hookups and never spoke since. All those who've matched with me subsequently also want serious relationships and ghost the second I admit otherwise. I've had much more fun via fab in the last 3 years, let's put it that way! " I’m poly and have that in my bio. So most of the people that end up matching with me actually say they’re cool because they aren’t looking for anything serious. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Since when was tinder last about casual sex? I couldn't get laid if I'd been locked in a brothel and the lights were off. 'No ONS’ on 80%+ female profiles.
And some 60+% of those specifying no ONS are exactly looking for that. But for all sorts of reasons say the opposite. The biggest difference between fab and tinder is women here are generally more explicit about what they're looking for."100% this. I’ve been on dates from tinder where women have talked about sleeping with guys even though the date has gone terribly because it’s tinder. That’s what people do. It isn’t hinge. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No one fancied me on tinder :'-(" I did! I just couldn't see you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Since when was tinder last about casual sex? I couldn't get laid if I'd been locked in a brothel and the lights were off. 'No ONS’ on 80%+ female profiles.
And some 60+% of those specifying no ONS are exactly looking for that. But for all sorts of reasons say the opposite. The biggest difference between fab and tinder is women here are generally more explicit about what they're looking for.
100% this. I’ve been on dates from tinder where women have talked about sleeping with guys even though the date has gone terribly because it’s tinder. That’s what people do. It isn’t hinge. "I do think that part of the contradiction of tinder is that it's image driven. What's the expression about the mask showing you the (wo)man? I'm not saying women on tinder are lying but it's not as easy for them to be honest about what they're looking for. So thats why so many stress they're #notthatsortofwoman | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Since when was tinder last about casual sex? I couldn't get laid if I'd been locked in a brothel and the lights were off. 'No ONS’ on 80%+ female profiles.
And some 60+% of those specifying no ONS are exactly looking for that. But for all sorts of reasons say the opposite. The biggest difference between fab and tinder is women here are generally more explicit about what they're looking for.
100% this. I’ve been on dates from tinder where women have talked about sleeping with guys even though the date has gone terribly because it’s tinder. That’s what people do. It isn’t hinge.
I do think that part of the contradiction of tinder is that it's image driven. What's the expression about the mask showing you the (wo)man?
I'm not saying women on tinder are lying but it's not as easy for them to be honest about what they're looking for. So thats why so many stress they're #notthatsortofwoman"So in order to appear less frivolous, women who want ONS explicitly state "No ONS!" on their profile and assume that men being men, and therefore mostly illiterate apes who think with their peepee, will still contact them for ONS? That's some next level reverse psychology stuff. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Since when was tinder last about casual sex? I couldn't get laid if I'd been locked in a brothel and the lights were off. 'No ONS’ on 80%+ female profiles.
And some 60+% of those specifying no ONS are exactly looking for that. But for all sorts of reasons say the opposite. The biggest difference between fab and tinder is women here are generally more explicit about what they're looking for.
100% this. I’ve been on dates from tinder where women have talked about sleeping with guys even though the date has gone terribly because it’s tinder. That’s what people do. It isn’t hinge.
I do think that part of the contradiction of tinder is that it's image driven. What's the expression about the mask showing you the (wo)man?
I'm not saying women on tinder are lying but it's not as easy for them to be honest about what they're looking for. So thats why so many stress they're #notthatsortofwoman"Same can of baked beans... Just a different shop window | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My impression was that Tinder started off as being the place for hookups, but then – like every other site that gets big – it got flooded with monogamists looking for The One™. Very depressing. I miss old OKC, before they fucked it up. " How have they fucked it up? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My impression was that Tinder started off as being the place for hookups, but then – like every other site that gets big – it got flooded with monogamists looking for The One™. Very depressing. I miss old OKC, before they fucked it up. How have they fucked it up? " Off the top of my head: - The big one was when they fundamentally changed the longstanding format to make it a swipe-based app like Tinder, rather than just showing you a web page of results you could browse at your leisure. - They also hid who likes you so you have to pay to see it. - They broke the “Nearby” function, so it shows you people hundreds of miles away rather than close to you. - They even broke their own new swipe format, so it now shows you the same people again and again and again no matter how many times you swipe left on them. I’ve been on OKC for a very long time, and I’ve watched it go from the best dating site to one of the worst. All of these changes took place after the Match group bought them out. I’ve seen it suggested that Match deliberately enshittened OKC to try to drive the users to their own site. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My impression was that Tinder started off as being the place for hookups, but then – like every other site that gets big – it got flooded with monogamists looking for The One™. Very depressing. I miss old OKC, before they fucked it up. How have they fucked it up? Off the top of my head: - The big one was when they fundamentally changed the longstanding format to make it a swipe-based app like Tinder, rather than just showing you a web page of results you could browse at your leisure. - They also hid who likes you so you have to pay to see it. - They broke the “Nearby” function, so it shows you people hundreds of miles away rather than close to you. - They even broke their own new swipe format, so it now shows you the same people again and again and again no matter how many times you swipe left on them. I’ve been on OKC for a very long time, and I’ve watched it go from the best dating site to one of the worst. All of these changes took place after the Match group bought them out. I’ve seen it suggested that Match deliberately enshittened OKC to try to drive the users to their own site. " Kudos for using the word "enshittens"... Simpsons fan? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tinder is the biggest and arguably the best place for hookups. This isn’t that surprising. I’d say if you just want a leg over you’re better off there than anywhere else. " Do you think it's the same for fems on there? I have no experience of dating sites, I like fab for the mindset of people on here, and less judged I imagine? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My impression was that Tinder started off as being the place for hookups, but then – like every other site that gets big – it got flooded with monogamists looking for The One™. Very depressing. I miss old OKC, before they fucked it up. How have they fucked it up? Off the top of my head: - The big one was when they fundamentally changed the longstanding format to make it a swipe-based app like Tinder, rather than just showing you a web page of results you could browse at your leisure. - They also hid who likes you so you have to pay to see it. - They broke the “Nearby” function, so it shows you people hundreds of miles away rather than close to you. - They even broke their own new swipe format, so it now shows you the same people again and again and again no matter how many times you swipe left on them. I’ve been on OKC for a very long time, and I’ve watched it go from the best dating site to one of the worst. All of these changes took place after the Match group bought them out. I’ve seen it suggested that Match deliberately enshittened OKC to try to drive the users to their own site. " Totally agree. Because you had a lot of space to write you could really get a sense of the person much better than the Tinder blank ones or Bumble. When I did pay for OK Stupid once all my matches were from like Peru and China, literally. "Nearby", as you say, can be almost anywhere in the solar system. Most of the time I get one or two messages on these things, then they read ny profile, ask me what "non-vanilla" means and if I'm in the RAF (I'm not but I wear something similar), and then it's like "I'm sure there are better options ". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry to bit a bit thick but what's ONS?" One night stand | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry to bit a bit thick but what's ONS? One night stand" Thanks | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry to bit a bit thick but what's ONS?" Glad you asked... I couldnt help thinking office for national statistics. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My impression was that Tinder started off as being the place for hookups, but then – like every other site that gets big – it got flooded with monogamists looking for The One™. Very depressing. I miss old OKC, before they fucked it up. How have they fucked it up? Off the top of my head: - The big one was when they fundamentally changed the longstanding format to make it a swipe-based app like Tinder, rather than just showing you a web page of results you could browse at your leisure. - They also hid who likes you so you have to pay to see it. - They broke the “Nearby” function, so it shows you people hundreds of miles away rather than close to you. - They even broke their own new swipe format, so it now shows you the same people again and again and again no matter how many times you swipe left on them. I’ve been on OKC for a very long time, and I’ve watched it go from the best dating site to one of the worst. All of these changes took place after the Match group bought them out. I’ve seen it suggested that Match deliberately enshittened OKC to try to drive the users to their own site. Totally agree. Because you had a lot of space to write you could really get a sense of the person much better than the Tinder blank ones or Bumble. When I did pay for OK Stupid once all my matches were from like Peru and China, literally. "Nearby", as you say, can be almost anywhere in the solar system. Most of the time I get one or two messages on these things, then they read ny profile, ask me what "non-vanilla" means and if I'm in the RAF (I'm not but I wear something similar), and then it's like "I'm sure there are better options "." It was very noticeable when match bought up the competition and the focus completely changed into a pay to play exercise. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My impression was that Tinder started off as being the place for hookups, but then – like every other site that gets big – it got flooded with monogamists looking for The One™. Very depressing. I miss old OKC, before they fucked it up. How have they fucked it up? Off the top of my head: - The big one was when they fundamentally changed the longstanding format to make it a swipe-based app like Tinder, rather than just showing you a web page of results you could browse at your leisure. - They also hid who likes you so you have to pay to see it. - They broke the “Nearby” function, so it shows you people hundreds of miles away rather than close to you. - They even broke their own new swipe format, so it now shows you the same people again and again and again no matter how many times you swipe left on them. I’ve been on OKC for a very long time, and I’ve watched it go from the best dating site to one of the worst. All of these changes took place after the Match group bought them out. I’ve seen it suggested that Match deliberately enshittened OKC to try to drive the users to their own site. Kudos for using the word "enshittens"... Simpsons fan? " Not at all. I recently read an article called 'The Enshittification of TikTok', about how capitalism inevitably makes websites crap, so it's in my brain from there. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My impression was that Tinder started off as being the place for hookups, but then – like every other site that gets big – it got flooded with monogamists looking for The One™. Very depressing. I miss old OKC, before they fucked it up. How have they fucked it up? Off the top of my head: - The big one was when they fundamentally changed the longstanding format to make it a swipe-based app like Tinder, rather than just showing you a web page of results you could browse at your leisure. - They also hid who likes you so you have to pay to see it. - They broke the “Nearby” function, so it shows you people hundreds of miles away rather than close to you. - They even broke their own new swipe format, so it now shows you the same people again and again and again no matter how many times you swipe left on them. I’ve been on OKC for a very long time, and I’ve watched it go from the best dating site to one of the worst. All of these changes took place after the Match group bought them out. I’ve seen it suggested that Match deliberately enshittened OKC to try to drive the users to their own site. Totally agree. Because you had a lot of space to write you could really get a sense of the person much better than the Tinder blank ones or Bumble. When I did pay for OK Stupid once all my matches were from like Peru and China, literally. "Nearby", as you say, can be almost anywhere in the solar system. Most of the time I get one or two messages on these things, then they read ny profile, ask me what "non-vanilla" means and if I'm in the RAF (I'm not but I wear something similar), and then it's like "I'm sure there are better options ". It was very noticeable when match bought up the competition and the focus completely changed into a pay to play exercise. " I'm really glad you wrote "pay to play" and not "pay to win", because even if you do throw money at the exercise it's no guarantee of getting anywhere. I know I've mentioned it already in my other reply, but the article 'The Enshittification of TikTok' is a really good summary of why websites, apps and services inevitably get worse rather than better. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My impression was that Tinder started off as being the place for hookups, but then – like every other site that gets big – it got flooded with monogamists looking for The One™. Very depressing. I miss old OKC, before they fucked it up. How have they fucked it up? Off the top of my head: - The big one was when they fundamentally changed the longstanding format to make it a swipe-based app like Tinder, rather than just showing you a web page of results you could browse at your leisure. - They also hid who likes you so you have to pay to see it. - They broke the “Nearby” function, so it shows you people hundreds of miles away rather than close to you. - They even broke their own new swipe format, so it now shows you the same people again and again and again no matter how many times you swipe left on them. I’ve been on OKC for a very long time, and I’ve watched it go from the best dating site to one of the worst. All of these changes took place after the Match group bought them out. I’ve seen it suggested that Match deliberately enshittened OKC to try to drive the users to their own site. Totally agree. Because you had a lot of space to write you could really get a sense of the person much better than the Tinder blank ones or Bumble. When I did pay for OK Stupid once all my matches were from like Peru and China, literally. "Nearby", as you say, can be almost anywhere in the solar system. Most of the time I get one or two messages on these things, then they read ny profile, ask me what "non-vanilla" means and if I'm in the RAF (I'm not but I wear something similar), and then it's like "I'm sure there are better options ". It was very noticeable when match bought up the competition and the focus completely changed into a pay to play exercise. I'm really glad you wrote "pay to play" and not "pay to win", because even if you do throw money at the exercise it's no guarantee of getting anywhere. I know I've mentioned it already in my other reply, but the article 'The Enshittification of TikTok' is a really good summary of why websites, apps and services inevitably get worse rather than better. " And yet, we are all guilty of playing the game...only to rinse and repeat with the next website/app. If we stopped playing | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You mean people use those sites just to get sex??? I'm shocked." So am I 
Tell me more  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
