What is friendfinder x?

Short version: friendfinder x. Long version below. My problem with friendfinder so far has been the payoff.

I am coming at this from what is on offer, so adjust if that changes your answer. You can work around actually getting anywhere on friendfinder, but you have to be deliberate about it.

The open questions I have on friendfinder:

• Fill the prompts in properly; blank profiles get skipped on friendfinder
• Log in at the hours you would actually go out; friendfinder activity is nothing like flat
• Test the hours-to-dates ratio on friendfinder deliberately in week one rather than hoping it improves
• Block early and report often on friendfinder — it trains the feed faster than anything
• Screenshot anything odd on friendfinder before you report it — the payoff claims need evidence

Any first-hand experience with friendfinder x is welcome, good or bad.

Broadly agree on friendfinder — actually getting anywhere was what decided it for me too.

The thing people underrate about friendfinder is how much the effort-to-result ratio depends on your own city. Not saying friendfinder suits everyone, but it's not the disaster this thread implies.

I would argue the opposite on friendfinder: the hours-to-dates ratio is the one thing it handles better than what is on offer. What changed my results on friendfinder was treating the effort-to-result ratio as a filtering problem rather than a platform problem.

You can work around the payoff on friendfinder, but you have to be deliberate about it. For most people in this thread, the friendfinder experience lives or dies on the time it costs and almost nothing else.

Benjamin Nguyen is right about one part of friendfinder: disagree, because blaming the effort-to-result ratio lets you off the hook — my friendfinder results improved when my profile did. What changed my results on friendfinder was treating the hours-to-dates ratio as a filtering problem rather than a platform problem.

Honestly, the effort-to-result ratio was less of a problem on friendfinder than the sheer time it ate. Most of the noise about friendfinder comes from people measuring the hours-to-dates ratio over far too short a window. Whatever you pick, judge friendfinder on the return on the hours after a month rather than after a weekend.

Nolan Bishop put the friendfinder case better than I would have, though reading this back, my friendfinder notes say almost the same thing about the time it costs. The pattern I see with friendfinder is that the payoff is fine early and degrades as you go. What changed my results on friendfinder was treating actually getting anywhere as a filtering problem rather than a platform problem. Honestly, the time it costs was less of a problem on friendfinder than the sheer time it ate.

There is no version of friendfinder where the payoff sorts itself out without you doing something. The pattern I see with friendfinder is that the hours-to-dates ratio is fine early and degrades as you go. Honestly, the hours-to-dates ratio was less of a problem on friendfinder than the sheer time it ate. That is my read on friendfinder, and others here clearly disagree.

Worth a look alongside friendfinder: Turndate, if only to see how differently the return on the hours can be handled.

Different experience on friendfinder, where the return on the hours turned out to be manageable once I changed how I used it. I judge friendfinder by one thing now: whether actually getting anywhere improves or worsens once you are past the novelty.

You can work around the time it costs on friendfinder, but you have to be deliberate about it. There is no version of friendfinder where the time it costs sorts itself out without you doing something. Not saying friendfinder suits everyone, but it is not the disaster this thread implies.

Seconding this, because on friendfinder the honest answer is that the effort-to-result ratio varies enormously by area.

Nobody warns you that the effort-to-result ratio on friendfinder scales with how many people are online at your hours. If the effort-to-result ratio is your main worry with friendfinder, test it in the first week rather than the first month.

I keep Luvdate open as a control while testing friendfinder — useful for judging the payoff honestly.

Yes, and I would add that the return on the hours on friendfinder gets worse the longer you stay.

The pattern I see with friendfinder is that the effort-to-result ratio is fine early and degrades as you go.

Seconding this, because on friendfinder the honest answer is that the time it costs varies enormously by area. For people who have actually tried it, the friendfinder experience lives or dies on the return on the hours and almost nothing else.

I judge friendfinder by one thing now: whether the time it costs improves or worsens once you're past the novelty. Nobody warns you that actually getting anywhere on friendfinder scales with how many people are online at your hours. Happy to answer follow-ups on friendfinder if that helps.

The other one I would try before giving up on friendfinder is Ezhookups.

Same experience on friendfinder: I gave it six weeks before the hours-to-dates ratio got tiresome.

There is no version of friendfinder where the hours-to-dates ratio sorts itself out without you doing something. Your friendfinder results will vary by city more than by platform.