Comments on: Match.com Launches Free Online Dating Site – DownToEarth.com

By: terry

terry — Sat, 09 May 2009 14:56:53 +0000

Just thought I would comment on down to earth.com,,,.they say it is 100% fee , NO it is not!!!! if you don’t pay and others don’t pay, you can only send a pre-designed flirt of a couple words , if someone who has paid sends a message they can provide a non paying person with info, and there is a limit on how many flirts you can send, then you get a message saying that you have used all the flirts permitted and no more available to flirt with that person, some ladies I would have like to chat with some of the ladies but required to pay first, before I pay I want to know that the women are real , not BOTS and really want to chat, 100% free it’s not

By: e

Mon, 05 Jan 2009 23:08:11 +0000

@ Hyb – I advise new people to start with match.com. Going with the biggest and most well-known service is best.

By: Hybban

Hybban — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 22:32:41 +0000

Oh it’s not for me, I have no intention for now of using any dating service, it was just that in your article you propose to people to stick with what they have. I was just wondering for new persons…

Hyb’

By: e

Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:23:08 +0000

@ messerole – OKC definitely has the better interface! POF is just awful. ;p There may be good people there, but I don’t want to stay there long enough to find them.

@ Hyb – DownToEarth is going to have a growth period, so there won’t be many people on it for a while. Honestly, I’d start with match.com. There’s a link for a free week trial if you check my dating help section.

@ Hammer – I agree that OKC has the myspace/LJ feel. It’s cute and has some neat features, but I definitely prefer match. Feel free to chat about it on your blog too!

By: Hammer

Hammer — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:30:32 +0000

Further to my last comment, I signed up to OKC last night to see what the buzz was about, and I was left feeling...well, like it was a MySpace/LJ clone. There is just something a bit...'off' about the whole thing, but I can't quite put my finger on it. I do like how you can do one search for women and men instead of one or the other. Anyway, kind of off topic of the original post. Very tempted to take the topic of dating sites to my own blog (Sorry e) so I can riff on it properly. Still sticking with Match. Hammer´s last blog post..Whats Cooking in 2009

By: Hybban

Hybban — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:02:55 +0000

Ok, stay where you are… But for a first try in dating, is it a good idea to begin with this site? I’ve no profile on any site and if I wanted to find somebody that could help me no?

Hyb’

By: messerole

messerole — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 14:45:47 +0000

THe quality of OKC is far superior to POF. I’ve had far more success there than Match.com, frankly. And I live in NYC.

By: e

Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:20:55 +0000

@ Hammer – I’m with you there.

By: Hammer

Hammer — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 04:17:59 +0000

I haven’t tried OKCupid, but if Plenty of Fish is anything to go by, I’ll be sticking with paying for Match.

It may cost me ten quid a month, but at least it helps get rid of spammers, filter out some time-wasters and doesn’t have as many barely comprehensible profiles.