Nothing published. That is not a guarantee the app is problem-free.
No specific positive published.
From our automated analysis, 15 Oct 2026.
This analysis describes version 6.6.8 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-15 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 6.6.8, updated 2026-09-24.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
PositiveSingles® has been catering to singles with STDs for over 24 years. Over 2.6 million members choose our app to save time, build connections confidently, and join a community of people who understand exactly what you're going through.
We strongly believe in protecting your privacy. We've never shared databases or disclosed personal info to any other app or company.
To provide the best user experience, we skip unproven or mediocre technology. We choose to work with only the best tech partners in the app industry.
PositiveSingles builds a positive and warm community here to help you find friendship, love, and understanding in a safe space. Whether you are looking for love or support after living with herpes or other STDs, you have come to the right place.…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
Paywall blocks the basics: raised by 5 distinct reviewers (1.0% of 509 reviews scanned)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The core of the app — not extras — sits behind payment, or previously-free function moved behind a paywall.
Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.
509 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
Have to pay for everything — You literally put all the features for members and made the app useless otherwise. You have to pay for everything and literally cannot messages anyone unless u pay the steep $34 a month. Most dating apps cost…
Paying to meet people — Why do we have to pay to talk to anyone we all struggle already and now have to pay for a service that should be free
Scummy with your money — You have to pay for a subscription for anything to work, and the moment it’s over they’ll cut you out of everything you’d already paid for. Any likes given while paying should be visible even after the…
A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.
Supporting measurements. They are not a complete list of possible harms or positives. “Not assessed” means we could not measure it — never zero, never a pass.
No package has been scanned for this app, so nothing is published about what it ships. That is an absence of evidence, not a finding.
Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 6.6.8 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-15 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 6.6.8, updated 2026-09-24.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
Move Forward! Find Love, Support & Hope! 1. Improve message stability. 2. Fixed some bugs.
Appworthy
positive-singles-apple-1419085637Assessed 2026-10-15 from 509 user reviews, the store listing and its privacy label. We have not scanned the app's package, so nothing on this page was read from inside the app itself.
What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.
No itemized purchase list is available for this listing.
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Write to [email protected], or use the form. Name the finding, the app version and the evidence that needs correcting. Factual corrections are free and never depend on buying anything.