It seems unavoidable that if we have filters and tick-boxes for features and likes or dislikes, we could be cutting off literally thousands of potential suitors because of something we might have thought minor or irrelevant if we met in the flesh.And, by the way, the tick-box that chooses whether you’re shown people with children or not can have an even more dramatic result, with 90% of the people I asked (a straw poll of 10 in the office) saying they’d chosen not to be shown people with children.Too many members with no filter can result in either hours of swiping to find someone you fancy, or hundreds of messages in your inbox that you’ll never have time to read.Here’s a guide to the sites to check out – feel free to leave your own recommendations in the comments below – and let us know if you met your life partner online or on an app and if so, which one. Has both desktop and mobile site and an app, plus paid-for and free singles events. It’s quite difficult to get any information on the price to use match.com’s full service.Very well managed, new, clean design makes it more appealing to navigate. When you click for more info you’ll more often than not end up with info boxes that you need to fill in before you can advance to the pricing info.We wish sites would be more transparent about their fees.
It is 100s of questions long and asks many probing questions about religion and moral views.Pros: Free to join and to have limited contact with members.You can connect with Facebook so getting started is much quicker than with other sites.There are no compatibility filters, so once you’ve filtered by the basics, there’s no way of narrowing it down.However, perhaps controversially, arguably this is more of a pro than a con – as the saying goes, opposites attract!