Lacebook thread >do you have a code? >do you want a code?

How does the invite thing work? Do you need to ask people you already know to approve you? Heard a few people talking about it but haven't used it myself

I've only heard bits and pieces about this but I'm intrigued. More info?

Is this even still relevant? I never hear about it anymore.

>>8833738
It's been three weeks with no answer to my application or my questions. Another friend hasn't gotten a reply either. I feel if LB will be invites only like before, it will fall again because its so exclusive to an amount of people and those people not wanting to invite other friends to make it "extra exclusive".

There's discussion in the wardrobe thread about it. I didn't know it existed until then. I don't care what it solves/lack of security on the rest of the net, I don't know anyone on it and I'm not handing strangers my real name. Lengthy social media presence should be enough.

>>8833768
They restarted the website and cleared out the accounts, so that's why people are hustling for invites again

>>8833763
As a member, you get 3 invites per month. You need to send your friends' (or whoever you want to invite's) email address to LB, they send your friend a code to sign up.
It's convoluted, but I figured it was the only way for them to keep track of who was inviting who, since I can't imagine invite code coding is all that easy.
I wish there was a true forum style thing. It's okay how it is now but I'm wondering how it will be once the site gets busier.

>>8833772
I'm with you anon.

>>8833772
So far, I've noticed that Amy the Yu, Kiznakasady, and Wonderfinch are mods. I don't like WF, but whatever, I don't think she's going to do anything with my name that any one of the 100-200 people I've bought from and sold to via Paypal over the last 5 years couldn't have already done.
>>8833769
Email them again. Both myself and two of my online acquaintances have recently gotten in. The LB Moderator account currently says in the description that they don't have any requests atm, but that could have just not been updated.

If nothing else, maybe reach out to your online friends for invite codes? I already invited a girl I've been talking to via our blogs/tumblr for the last couple of years. 3 invite codes a month per person doesn't seem all that exclusive to me.

>>8833776
That's fucking stupid and the invite only system is why Google+ failed. There's no way this will work.

I'd like to join, but the security bothers me. Who are the admin and what are they doing with the info?

>>8833791
Google+ failed because FB already had too much momentum and G+ brought practically nothing new (and good) to the table.
3 invites per month isn't even bad. My whole comm could be invited in like two weeks, if the processing time wasn't too bad.
I invite three friends, they invite 9 more, those 9 invite another 27, etc.

>>8833793
What's with all of these stupid questions lately? It is clear that they are being strict to weed out weirdos. Not sure why you would think it goes beyond that.

>>8833810
Not that anon, but G+ has a lot of nicer features than FB now. And the lack of ads and click bait is pretty nice.
I wish we could switch, but everyone is lazy.

>>8833793
I asked them that twice and I haven't gotten a responds which really pisses me off because you would think they will answer question in a timely matter.

>>8833738
>>do you believe it can solve the fractioning off of the online lolita community?

I don't know if it will completely solve it but I think it can certainly help.

The biggest thing I've liked about Lacebook so far is the exclusivity to lolitas: on facebook and tumblr there's so many fucking annoying people that you run into including fetishists and kink people, a particular brand of itas, admirers of the fashion who own nothing but think they are lolita experts, predators and random creeps (kinda falls in with fetishists and kinksters), people who literally have no idea what lolita is, and so on and so forth. I'm far from being a snob but I like that I can go on lacebook and interact with other people who are actually lolitas.

>>8833772
How are you signing up? For me, a friend posted a link on their facebook page and I singed up through that and I've never shared my real name anywhere aside from my first name. Under my profile settings I do have the option to connect my profile to Facebook but nowhere has it ever prompted me to force me to connect it to FB or my real full name.

>>8833909
>The biggest thing I've liked about Lacebook so far is the exclusivity to lolitas: on facebook and tumblr there's so many fucking annoying people that you run into including fetishists and kink people, a particular brand of itas, admirers of the fashion who own nothing but think they are lolita experts, predators and random creeps (kinda falls in with fetishists and kinksters), people who literally have no idea what lolita is, and so on and so forth. I'm far from being a snob but I like that I can go on lacebook and interact with other people who are actually lolitas.
Seconding this, the invite system is a hassle but avoiding the weirdos on CoF etc is worth it. I don't care so much about weirdos on tumblr because I don't use my real name there.

>>8833825
Hey family, we should try to get g+ popular as a lolita community space. I used to be very active on it up until last year when all my friends started ignoring it

I don't think I'm very photogenic, and as a result there tend to not be very many pictures of me in lolita. Should I even bother trying to get an account?

>>8833918
I'd be up for that. None of my friends were ever using it, but maybe I could convince a few.

>>8833772
You only need to give your name if you can't get an invite. Basically, you need someone to vouch that you're not a creep and you're actually a lolita.
>>8833909
I like that it's exclusive, too! I don't care if it gets off to a slow start or that I had to share my stuff in order to join; the fact that it keeps out weirdos and people who aren't even lolitas is enough for me.
It's nice that it's totally separate from facebook and all that, and that it's totally private to non-members. I hope it takes off.

>>8833918
>>8833930
I'd like it too, at least better than facebook or tumblr or lacebook.

>>8833932
>it's totally private to non-members.
yes! I forgot to mention that in my post but this SO MUCH. You can't even view the site unless you're a member and I really appreciate that. I feel empathetic towards the people who are having a pain in the ass trying to sign up but please take my word that the exclusivity is worth it.

>>8833913
True, but the tumblr creeps suck because sometimes what happens is that fetishists and kinksters will reblog your totally normal SFW photos onto their 18+ nsfw porn blogs and there's tons of them who refuse to understand why girls wouldn't want their *normal* pictures on a porn blog, even if the owners of said porn blog claim to be legitimately interested. On tumblr your shit is really out in the open for everyone to see. On facebook there's sort of a larger degree of privacy but then since your real name and information is attached there's also almost not. On lacebook I know who's seeing my stuff and I know who I'm talking to and interacting with.

This bit sounds a bit snobby but also with all the people on tumblr sometimes I like to know that the people interacting with my posts and such are fellow lolitas, rather than just admirers. Nothing wrong with admirers if they aren't weirdos but it's nice to interact with other people in the hobby and I've found it hard to find lolitas on tumblr for some reason.

(admittedly the biggest thing I hate about tumblr is just the kinksters that spill over and think we're one of them because of the fashion)

I just requested an invite, let's see how long this takes. I feel like this could be great if people use it, and not let it die.

>>8833935
I agree. Let's do this. Just changed my G+ account to look more lolita appropriate. This is a lot easier than having to have a separate fb account for lolita stuff.

>>8833790
>wonderfinch

Lol no way am I joining. She's one of the worst mods that EGL ever had.

>>8833965
I'm doing the same!
Are there any existing communities on G+?

>>8833975
Whats the tl;dr on wonderfinch?

>>8833994
There are, idk how good they are, though. There is also a cgl community.

>>8834025
I'm searching through a few and a few of them are terrifyingly basic.
for example one post says
>So here's an anime that perfectly demonstrates Lolita fashion. It's called " Rozen Maiden"
And from the looks of it the owner posted it....

Would it be better to make and mod our own? That way we could make a closed community and only allow those in who are actually into lolita. With not nearly as stringent requirements as Lacebook though.

>>8834030
I agree, we should probably make our own. But we need people to post content and keep it going, otherwise it won't be interesting for others to join in.

>>8834047
Maybe make it with a focus of something between a cross of CoF and Lolita Updates? General discussions as well as coord posts?

>>8834054
I like that idea anon. What did egl on LJ do back in it's hayday? I wasn't there to experience it.

>>8834054
>>8834047
>>8833994
>>8834025
Does someone want to make a G+ thread?

>>8833930
Look for EGL on g+, I just made a page. Please help me get this going, I will be open to any suggestions. My goal is to make it akin to what LJ used to be

>>8834068
I wasn't either unfortunately. Going through the archives that seems to be the general themes.

>>8834070
I'll make one.

>>8834071
Also please send me pics that you like better since i just used a random picture (I know someone will bitch about it but I didn't know what to use). and if you want to be a mod I will gladly figure out how to add you

>>8833995
>admin of egl
>one time egl had to close down due to drama and someone found a message of hers saying she wanted to "kick someone in the teeth"
> idk I don't think it was meant to be a physical threat but whatever
> perma ita
> major sjw
> in like, a believes everyone is racist way
> lies about how long she has been in lolita

>>8834090
Created a thread for egl on G+

I have an account.
I keep forgetting I have an account.
I haven't logged in for months.
My account is probably gone.

>>8834071
Is it the page that's private with lace as the avatar?

>>8834091
Just joined, thanks for approving me.

Would like an invite. Would anyone spare?

>>8834113
I honestly wouldn't feel comfortable giving them out randomly. I have a feeling that if the people you vouched for started fucking up, it would come back to you. That's kind of the whole point of the invite system.

>>8834099
Yes, feel free to join if you want. I can send an invite to your email if you can't figure out the interface. I'm leaving this thread now so I stop derailing.

Sorry OP

>>8834089
Also she totally fucked up maikodolly scammer situation with her ineptitude

WF: "everything is fine guys, I have a special source and I've verified that she's not a scammer"

>the source is maikodolly herself

>>8834093
It 100% is, since they wiped all the accounts and started over

That being said, I don't see why they think it'll work any better this time around. Last time no one came because they same pictures are already uploaded on Tumblr and CoF. Is there really enough content to discuss to keep it afloat? If people used it as a blogging platform I can see it being a thing, one of my problems with following lolita bloggers is that they're mostly on different platforms.

>>8834246
god how the hell is wf still around and still a MOD? she also was called out for lying about how long she's been into lolita.

>>8834302
What? Are you telling me that her top coord skills is not the result of TEN YEARS IN THIS FASHION?
When did she get called out for that anyways? I think I might have missed it.

>>8834351
It was on RC:U a few months back iirc, I'll try to find the post.

>>8834351
There were a few secrets on BrB, and screenshots in the archive

>>8833790
WF, seriously? Does she shitpost and powertrip on LB like she does in the FB comms? I'd like to join LB but not if I constantly have to watch my language so that WF won't misconstrue some random comment as omg totes racist and fucking bans me just because she has a stick up her ass.

>>8834461
Same here.
I personally think this racist power tripping brand ita shouldn't be a mod anywhere as she abuses her power and attacks people for for being white with her "cultural appropriation" & "white privilege" bullshit rants.
I won't be joining Lacebook because of her, I can live without it.

>>8833738
Does anyone know if the
>name
is your actual name or a user name? i finally got my invite and im trying to sign up.

>>883488
I used my actual name, but I've seen others that don't.

>>8834889
It's your username. Put whatever you want in. You can change it after you sign up by going to "settings" as well.

Does anyone else find it extremely frustrating that you can't edit your own photo posts? Why should a mod be able to edit my post but I can't?

>>8836329
Holy shit yeah it's insanely annoying. They need to fix that

>>8834482
I can't stand her SJW comments. She comes off as racist herself for making them. Do you think if a bunch of us email LB about it they will take away her mod status?

>>8836453
Possibly. But we will probably have to include her horrible behavior as a mod as well (like when she said she wanted to kick someone's teeth in), as well as her SJW-ness

If a mod is making this many people uncomfortable then they shouldn't be a mod, to be honest.

>>8836453
>>8836488
Seconding. I don't feel comfortable with her being the LB mod.

>>8834301
Shit, I didn't realise. Well then.

I doubt it'll do any better, personally. People will use it to cross post at best.

>>8836329
>>8836449
Not being able to edit posts at all is super frustrating.

>>8836453
I'm not sure, it depends on whether the other mods are her friends or not.
If you email, use a throwaway email and don't reveal your name, cause WF/Cimoan will probably vendetta your ass if she finds out who you are.
I do agree with you and the others though, she really shouldn't be a mod.
Mods shouldn't threaten, make accusations, brand people racist, pick fights and start drama.
Mods should be the peacekeepers of the board, not the drama instigators!

Looks like Lacebook is already starting to die. The amount of activity from the end of December to now is ridiculous. Too bad I really liked the place.

>>8834119
>>8834119
Not the same person but I think it's mostly to keep their server costs down by limiting the number of people that can join.

>>8840380
If that's the case then maybe they should come up with some sort of premium account. It would be paid and offer a few extra features like more picture slots and maybe more invited per month.
I'm not sure what else LB does, so I can't mention anymore premium features.

>>8840221
Thats disappointing. Is it worth asking for an invite anymore if its dying off?

>>8840221
Like a lot of others have said, the invite system makes the site way too exclusive and it's hard for lolitas who don't have other lolita friends to even consider getting an account.
I understand that it's mainly done to keep non-lolitas away, but I feel that's what moderators and admins are for. The community as a whole isn't terribly big and I think it would be somewhat simple to weed out the creeps from a site like that.
See a profile that obviously doesn't belong to a lolita? Report it and have the admins actually take care of it rather than limiting the people that can make an account on the site.

I do like the fact that one can't see the site's contents unless you have an account. I think that's a good feature because all you can have is a log in page or a sign up page with no info about the site other than a title. Lolitas will know what it is while others might have a little harder time figuring this is a site full of girls in frilly outfits.

>>8833738

the problem with lacebook is the same problem with lacemarket, a bunch of designers or very poorly skilled web developers buying a premade script and trying to make it work.

It's not going to work. Stop trying to make it work

>>8845169
The community as a whole is massive. One of the original reasons for the exclusiveness is because of the fact that the site couldnt handle the amount of ppl. If you look at the amount of people joining the fb groups such as rc of cof, you see tons of people, and there is no way a moderator can go through everyone after the fact.

>>8845182
Of course there's no one one mod could go through it all, but that's what I'm saying with the report functions and having a team instead of just a few people. Know what I mean?
But I guess even that's too much to ask for without many resources.