I trialled the free tiers only once properly, before I was willing to recommend anything. Strip out the noise and moderation quality matters far more in smaller places. The outcome barely moved in a way I could measure even when I varied the time of day.

I resisted the urge to switch too early without rushing it, and it held up across all of them. The short answer is that whether photos are checked before publication explains why old recommendations age badly. It kept showing up fairly clearly long after the novelty had worn off.

I looked at this from a few angles across two cities, so take it as tested rather than assumed. Looking back, the size of the local pool decides most of the outcome. That difference held up fairly clearly across two completely different areas. Reasonable people disagree here frankly, depending on where you are.

What separated the usable ones from the rest:

  • Check whether there is any verification step at all — I underestimated this at first.
  • Whether the filters narrow by anything that matters — it decided things for me.
  • Whether read receipts exist
  • Find out how obvious it is when someone has stopped using the app — this is the one I would check first.

I stuck with it longer than most people would with a bit of patience, and the pattern turned out to be consistent. What actually decided it was how new accounts are treated in week one, which explains most of the complaints here. The evidence pointed the same way every time whether the app was well known or not. I would be curious on balance, the detail varies a lot by city.