>>34144179
Fair enough. I also noticed a bot in the new feed anyway, so I'll try reverting the changes and simply filtering unverified profiles

>>34143094
Meh. People do it all the time on normie apps. Bumble even has "travel mode" as a paid-for feature. If they're doing it on Duolicious as part of an overall catfishing effort, then you should report. Otherwise, no

>>34139262
https://duolicious.app/blog/psychoanalysing-chatgpt-using-statistics-to-make-a-decent-dating-app/

tl;dr you're matched with similar people

inb4 "but I don't want to be matched with my clone"

>>34139013
I don't remember looking at that report but if they had a huge dildo as their first pic and it was part of a highly sexual profile, I probably removed it. If it was just inconspicuously hiding in the background of the last pic, I probably left it

>>34138532
>Really does seem like dating apps in general are the problem, not the people that host/manage them.
I agree with this but it's a very difficult problem to solve because people won't stop using dating apps unless the government steps in and just makes them illegal, which would generate (or first require) lots of other problems to be solved

>>34134397
I've been monitoring some submissions and haven't noticed many catfishes slipping though. Can you report it? For example, I frequently get one-word reports from users who performed reverse-image searches. But knowing which image to reverse-image-search with which search engine would go a long way

>>34134353
No but profiles can be internally marked as requiring verification. Those profiles are removed from the feed and in search, and can't send any messages until they get verified

>>34134146
Not unless they're breaking the rules, or are likely to. I don't know about her, but it's common for kids to rebel against parents