[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/cgl/ - Cosplay & EGL

View post   
File: 55 KB, 494x454, 38773481753_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7723806 No.7723806[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Lacemarket might be shutting down?

>> No.7723854

>>7723806
I really hope it doesn't, it's much easier to use than having to wait 24 hours to post on egl comm sales. Guess we shall see whether someone else will take over or not.

>> No.7723856

They're actually developing a newer version. Check the recent comments on the thread.
7710379

>> No.7723861

>>7723806
It's not surprising really, and it was going to happens sooner or later with the way she was running it. Unwanted attention my ass. If you're not prepared to mod a website properly of course you're going to bring attention to yourself.

I do hope someone better takes it over, though. It is easier than livejournal. I've often had to wait two or three days to have posts approved on lj.

>> No.7723891
File: 199 KB, 350x490, 1356623424961.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7723891

>>7723861
As a web developer, and someone who's done a number of side projects, I have to say the stalking and harassment she was getting for a free site that she was spending her own time and money on, is phenomenally bad, and the lolita community should be ashamed.

This isn't how you treat people who offer services like that for free. Yeah, she probably was slow moderating, it was just her, because LM was the equivalent amount of work as a full time job, and not generating significant income.

I'm not surprised she's walking. I'd walk. I wouldn't accept this for pay. I'd leave a client who treated me the way she has been treated. The lolita community is incredibly shitty to the sales comm moderators on LJ, and a number of people have been incredibly shitty to her. It's not ok. It's not a normal client-developer relationship for a paid project, let alone something pro-bono. I don't know a single professional who would put up with the level of bullshit people have been giving her. I'm glad she's getting out of it, because no one deserves that.

And I enjoyed LM, and I hope someone else takes over. But I also hope the community wakes the fuck up and the people who have been acting like utter douche bags get the fuck out because it's really not ok how people have been acting about this.

>> No.7723926

>>7723891
I have a problem with people saying it's the "lolita community's" fault, though. A few rotten apples sour the whole damn bushel, yes, but the fact that one or two anons with corn cobbs up their arses went after does not mean that the whole community is responsible. iirc, the person who posted her personal info wasn't even a seagull but rather was just passing through from /g/.
It does fucking suck, but I also wish she'd reached out and gotten more help before now when she's going to just quit.
I hope we can muster up enough devs to sort everything out.

>> No.7724050

bump

>> No.7724057
File: 18 KB, 501x193, lace market.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7724057

>>7723926
>>7723891

>> No.7724232

I'm think about taking it over
Would anyone mind paying a small fee (like $2) to use it?

I don't think I'll be able to run that site for free

>> No.7724240

Oh no

>> No.7724253

>>7724232
If you have a donation box you should be able to receive enough funding, given that you make it clear that this box would run the site's existence. Since there will be people who want to donate only 1 dollar and others who are okay with donating 10, and this way you aren't bothering the entire community on LM to spend money on a site that used to be free.

>> No.7724278

>>7724232
What about a mandatory fee of $2 or whatever for every listing that ends over $100?
People who don't want to pay that small extra to keep a better, safer selling platform open are just entitled cuts and can go back to the LJ comm sales.

>> No.7724293

>>7724253
>>7724278

I like both of these ideas
Another thing is that I have no idea how to run a site much less do code and stuff.

Hopefully someone better than me steps up to the plate

>> No.7724310

>>7723861
Agreed. The whiteknighting in the other thread is fucking absurd. In the thread where LM was conceived, everyone was talking about how if the site was just going to be abandoned, don't bother. Alice swore up and down that wouldn't happen.

And look what happened, and now there's all this 'ooohhhh don't feel bad Alice~ you tried~' I'm unconvinced it's not her or friends.

>> No.7724325

>>7724057
Jesus, people need to get a grip on themselves about this whole OMG CYBER BULLYING thing.

>> No.7724326

>>7723861
>>7724310
Idk man, she did it for free and for something that was done for free it really wasn't awful. That last thread itself had a mix of positive and negative, a lot focused on how bratty and young the buyers seem on this platform.

Could you expect yourself to do a time consuming project for free FOREVER?

>> No.7724329

>>7724310
This is how I felt. After the failed forum thing that happened last summer (or maybe autumn, I can't recall), multiple people warned her that it might fail and would take a lot of time/effort. I'm grateful for the time she's put in (though she also said she hadn't updated or improved in a really long time), but I think she's acting a bit naively and manipulatively.

>>7724232
I think charging a membership fee or a transaction fee for expensive auctions would actually be good. Figure out how much the site is going to cost to maintain and charge somewhat accordingly.
Donations like >>7724253 stated are also an option, but then you run into tragedy of the commons issues where no one pays for anything (poor mootykins knows this well).

>> No.7724338

>>7724326
>Could you expect yourself to do a time consuming project for free FOREVER?
Yeah. Even moot couldn't do it.

>> No.7724416

>>7724329
>>7724278
>>7724293
I wonder how complex this would be to implement though. Perhaps creating a "premium" membership that would allow you post >$100 auctions? And then if you have a successful auction you will get automatically invoiced on paypal? Or the amount is added to your balance like it is on Ebay? If they don't pay up, freeze their account? I could see how enforcing this might get difficult.

Maybe a monthly premium membership fee would be better? but then that's not as good for the seller if you don't sell very much.

>> No.7724451

Why not just take a small percentage of every sale...or only for sales over $100 or something.

>> No.7724458

>>7724416
Premium auctions should be more than $100, if such a thing is implemented. I'd say sales over $200.
I think selling a membership would be easier to implement than tacking on fees to auctions. Tbh, lacemarket is so much easier/faster to use than LJ that I'm sure most of the userbase would be fine with paying $2-5 for a basic membership. If money becomes an issue, fees or a premium membership could be introduced. I'm kind of against the idea that the seller should have to pay the fee, though, as sellers already get hit by PP. Buyers are benefiting from the service as well, which is why I think a general membership fee might be better.
A premium membership could also allow users to list more items. A number of consignment shops have begun to use the site, and honestly, I think they should have to pay a fee moreso than the average user.

>> No.7724472

>>7724458
having a premium membership would also give people more incentive to become mods -- for example, get a free premium membership if you are a mod. Then they at least get *something* out of it even if they can't be paid with money.

>> No.7724493

>>7724472
Plenty have people have offered to mod, is the thing. I've offered on no less than three separate occasions yet have never received an offer or been contacted to mod. I waste my day browsing the damn website anyways, I might as well mod.

>> No.7724512

>>7723856
Why the fuck did you put your email in?

Fucking summer.

>> No.7724514

>>7723891
Stalking and harassment? What actually happened?

>> No.7724527

>>7724458
That
That sounds really good tbh (op here)

Like free users get like 10 auctions a month while premium users get like 20?

>> No.7724528

>>7724232
The site is only like $4 a month.

>> No.7724533

>>7724493
based on a decade of forum usage, people who whine the most about wanting to be mods usually make the shittiest mods.

>> No.7724543
File: 48 KB, 344x512, janman.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7724543

>>7724326

>> No.7724547

>>7724528
really? she made it sound like it was a lot, given the whole "need to have a full-time job" stuff

>> No.7724550

>>7724547
Yeah the hosting site lists the price as $3.95. Heck even the cloud storage one was only $20 or so.

>> No.7724611

>>7724550
Oh!
That's amazing news

>> No.7724629

>>7724547
Time is more the issue here than money.

>> No.7724644

>>7724533
I've successfully modded three forums before (granted, two were whiney teen bullshit forums, but still). I am also a mod of a fairly drama-free comm. I offered to mod because I spend way too much time browsing sales already and wouldn't mind doing something semi-productive with my time.
I think a lot this has more to do with the creator being mia/not super responsive than a lack of willing people.

>>7724527
That's what I was thinking. It's enough listings that the average user won't be inconvenienced by it but people who use the site a lot (and thus benefit the most from it) will have to purchase in to premium.

>>7724528
Are you serious? This should not be a problem, then.

>> No.7724657

>>7724644
>I think a lot this has more to do with the creator being mia/not super responsive than a lack of willing people.
I agree here. She has seemed a bit flaky imho. From the image I've gotten from her through recent research, it seems this was more of a project to pad her portfolio than one she was extremely invested in for the community(inb4 entitlement I never said it was a bad thing, just that it was a thing)so she doesn't really have the time to take care of it as well as more lucrative projects.

>> No.7724664

This is what you can do to make LM profitable.

> each user van only post 5 items for free
> Buy basic membership to list up to 15 items - either something like $2/month, or 0.50c every time you want to list an extra item without buying membership
> Buy $3/month membership to list more than 15 items
> front page rights
Front page can list 10 items everyday. You have to bid to have your item listed on front page. Highest bidders get front page display. Refreshes every 24 hours.
> advertisiments, no need to explain

The biggest problem with LM is lack of user friendliness. I gladly offered to do up the design when I was free, but they preferred somebody else to do it (and they only changed some graphics lol...) Now I don't know if I have the time.

The layout and the words used - basically the design of the website - has a lot more room for improvement.

>> No.7724668

>>7724664
Once LM is deemed some what profitable, anybody will feel that it's less of a pain/burden to manage. So LM should be some what profitable for it to sustain.

>> No.7724682

>>7724664
I like the "front page listing" idea.
I also wondered why there wasn't more advertising. seems like an obvious first step to make more money.

>> No.7724689

>>7724664
But are people actually going to pay for what is basically a niche ebay? I mean I guess if you want to weed out 'flaky' buyers and sellers it might be alright, but it seems like there are still just too many other free places that offer the same service. There's little incentive to actually pay for this.

>> No.7724696

>>7724682
Maybe LM wasn't attractive enough to major shops. Maybe because LM was still new. Maybe the advertisements were too expensive.

I thought about the idea of bidding for the front page more, and I really wish that will happen. All the delicious drama when somebody promotes their iron gate to the front page!!!! Mmmmm...

I also suggest small pockets of ads that randomly appear on the website. If you pay for example $5? for a specific item you are selling, your listing will appear in these ads. This can replace the space that is currently called "similar listings"

>> No.7724703

>>7724696
I meant using something like google adsense, which is free. but.. maybe there were legal issues? I dunno how it really works.

>> No.7724706

>>7724689
maybe just have a thing that pops up every time yo make a sale and says something like 'if you like our service please donate!' or something. but if $ isnt much of an issue then whatever l0l

can whoever gets it change the layout please...

>> No.7724713

>>7724689
You can choose to not pay for LM. Then you are limited to having only 5 sales at one time.

Benefits include
> filtering out scrappy offbrand sellers who aren't even Lolita
> actual lolitas will be more prudent in listing what they have for sale. Meaning less nonsense like rubiconscloset's ratty shoes.
> users who don't wish to pay for LM can still sell things for free.

However turning LM into a payable service means that the quality of LM has to be raised. Banned items need to be removed, user interface needs to be improved, scammers need to be kept out. Shitty buyers and sellers have to either change for the better or made to leave.

Keeping LM a completely free/non-profit website is too much. Nobody can handle that. Ideally, the manager of LM should be somebody who already has a source of stable income, at the same time lots of free time to manage LM. The profits made from LM will be an incentive to keep the website running.

>> No.7724714

>>7724706
Me and my roommate were thinking of getting it. Also yes the layout is terribad.

>> No.7724717

>>7724713
>Keeping LM a completely free/non-profit website is too much
But it's not though. It's really cheap to host and if you get 1 or 2 people who have time for upkeep and also have actual mods, it will pretty much run itself.

>> No.7724719

>>7724713
Crappy offbrsnd sellers*
I hate typing on my phone.

>>7724706
We can have both Google ad sense, and advertisments paid for by lolitas/LM users. There are pros and cons to either.

>> No.7724721

If it's possible, maybe make a system where a seller can set a limit to whatever amount of negatives they want to filter from a person bidding on their listings.
Oh, and being able to filter buyers from other countries from bidding on your listings would be nice as well. So many people just don't read details, it's ridiculous.

>> No.7724726

>>7724717
The issue with money isn't about paying for web hosting only. There's the intangible things like time/effort you spend on LM - from planning how the webtsite should be, executing these plans and then fixing bugs/problems. If LM is some what profitable it is easy to feel like you want to keep the website up. Not only do you do what you like, you earn some spare cash from it. And then maybe some Internet Ego cred for being a ~sales community owner~

>> No.7724742

>>7724664
super seconding all of these. I have no prpblem with someone turning a profit as long as they maintain the site properly.

Percentage of auction isn't realistic, too hard to make sure people pay and and I only buy brand usually over 200usd as do many lolitas. Id much rather pay 3-5 usd a month for adspace or better filtering.

>> No.7724780

>>7724514
People were pointing out that the moderation on the website was very lax, that there were bugs in the coding that were reported a long time ago but never fixed, and that the site seemed abandoned.

Also, someone pointed out that the person who runs LM had a (deleted) LJ account with some bad feedback--selling items with stains, tears, etc.

So basically "criticism is STALKING AND HARASSMENT."

>> No.7724793

Omg just make the search work properly that's all I ask.

>> No.7724860

>>7724780
Somebody from /g/ dug up LM owner's personal info like her name and IP address.

>> No.7724944

Anyone else remember frillsRus? What happened to that one?

>> No.7725053

>>7724664
>>7724713

Ok guys it's nice to imagine functions like these but did you notice this website is a WordPress with little to no security enforced ? Basic test I do everytime is see if the owner has lazily left wp- prefix in the base and didn't secure the folders (copy and paste img URL, delete the end and access the folder), that just tells me the security was never improved.

Sooo my conclusion is that the owner is not a totally professionnal dev (or maybe she is and spend her time on her job instead of this project, which I understand), chances are she doesn't know how to create those functions in the first place as the auction system is a WP plugin (no offense if she reads that, I'm a junior myself, still learning).

So you'd need a real trained dev because I doubt the plugin is prepared to do that, that means you'd have to pay a hefty price as development is real hard and I doubt anyone has the money to do so. Maybe a Kickstarter ?

Basically : I'm 95% sure it won't happen and LM will stay as it is, or until the auction plugin upgrades, who knows ?

>> No.7725072

>>7724682
Sent the admin a few messages about advertising and she never replied

>> No.7725137

>>7725053
I'm a UX/UI designer. I'd consider taking the site over if I could get one of my dev friends at work to agree to help me rebuild the site all over and get it working properly, but that's a pretty big ask.

I would totally take it over if I knew anything about backend dev. If anyone here is a competent developer and understands security and can work with a far more appropriate CMS than wordpress, I'd be more than happy to do all the IA and design. I also feel the site MUST be made responsive.

Kickstarter might be a good idea to at least raise enough funds for a developer's time.

>> No.7725165

>>7724458

I like your idea much better. Don't think most of us mind paying such a small amount monthly to use the site.
This should be for both buyers and sellers, to make it fair.
Don't quite like the whole premium membership thing, but I understand where you're coming from.
Also, quite a few auctions ended with non-paying buyers, if you have to pay a fee for something that you eventually have to relist that would be bitter, that's why I personally would prefer just a general membership for all, no extra fees for sellers.
Troll bidders (aka non-paying jerks) might also be deterred if they have to pay monthly to use the site, all in all, general membership might make everything better for the whole selling community.
I assume the new owners of LM will step up on moderation, especially if it becomes a paid site.

I really hope LM will continue to exist, it's a good selling platform, much better than shitty LSE and LJ.

>> No.7725169

>>7724472

I would love to become a mod, not for free membership but I like helping out and I have the time to volunteer.
It would be nice if LM has mods from all over the world because of language barriers and different time zones. Since I'm European I'd be able to work on hours that USA based mods can't cause they're sleeping, plus I speak 2 languages fluently.

>> No.7725180

>>7725137
I don't really know if there are easy to administer CMS for auctions stuff, wordpress isn't that bad in itself but you have to upgrade by yourself the security at least and be able to create some plugins and fix bugs.

Usually CMS made to do one thing, like listings, are kinda hard to grasp and personnalise. I really don't know if auctions websites are hard to create from scratch with a competent security and member space, but Kickstarter seems the more sensible thing.

Ladies, a developper, even for WP plugins, is often really busy and highly paid. I doubt a competent one will be interested to invest quite some time for little money, but that's my guess.

>> No.7725181
File: 26 KB, 480x314, 1393115540626.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7725181

exception: they doxed you

>> No.7725197

>>7724682
I remember Alice mentioning that she only really wanted relevant ads, which is why you'd see the ads for Dear Lenore etc, rather than porn sites or whatever.

>> No.7725269

Obviously with the website in its current state with Paypal payments and private invoices, I don't see how they can demand a cut of items over $100, for example. You have to collect payment elsewhere like on the listings or a membership.

>> No.7725425

>>7724458 here again.
With the redesign (if it actually happens), I think another thing that definitely needs to be improved is the messaging system, as right now the reply system is very wonky and it's impossible to view older messages in your inbox.

I agree with >>7725169 that having mods from multiple areas and with multi-lingual abilities would be nice. That way, there is more likely to be a mod available no matter the time of day (or night). While language barriers aren't too much of a problem on the internet nowadays, the potential option of being able to contact a mod in your native language might be nice.

I wouldn't mind the owner turning a profit on the site, but I would prefer it money made from the site was first used to make sure that it could continue to run for the foreseeable future. I.e. if the site makes $200 in its first month but only costs $5 to run, I would prefer that $100 be set aside to pay for monthly hosting fees for the next year rather than having the owner pocket it all.
If after the first few months or so the site is continually generating a surplus of money, I would be fine with the owner keeping that.
Free membership for mods is a cool idea, though I am willing to mod for free. Since un-answered complaints are/were a big issue, I think increased modding is crucial. Setting stricter/clearer guidelines and creating a protocol for how to respond to complaints/messages might make it go smoother as well.

>> No.7725765

LaceMarket is going to be completely redone in terms of the backend (and possibly the frontend/design).

This means that hosting WILL be more expensive than before. The cost depends on how big the database is and where it will be hosted. You can't just find regular web servers for hosting anymore, because not all servers host webapps built with Rails (which is the most likely candidate for Lacemarket's new backend).

It was easy to find cheap hosts because LM was a heavily customized version of Wordpress, and you can host a Wordpress site fucking anywhere for really cheap.

It's a little irksome to read comments speculating price, especially if you haven't developed before. Cost isn't just finding a server that advertises $X/mo. There are a variety of other factors that go it, especially now that the backend will be different.

>> No.7725767

>>7725137
You should contact Alice. She's putting together a team for developers for the backend, and I'm not sure she has anyone who can do design/frontend/ux stuff yet.

Just shoot her an email and I'm sure that she'll consider having you work with the new LM team

>> No.7725777

... Just noticed there is a summerfag from my comm complaining about Lacemarket prices and being fat/poor. She seems to think that Lacemarket is making money off of the sales and she "just can't support the site if dresses are over $100!".

God, autumn cannot get here fast enough.

>> No.7725782

>>7725777

Haha I saw that too. This Erin girl that popped up on cgl a few days ago with a snarky comment on another stupid person's post already answered her. I don't want to get involved in drama so I didn't post anything, but seriously I am glad someone tells this newfags to stfu.

>> No.7725788

>>7725782
That Erin chick really needs to learn how to act outside of /cgl/. Yeah, that chick is being totally new and stupid, but just leave the tubby be, no need to cause a fight in a fucking sales group over something so stupid.

>> No.7725790

>>7725782
I am sorry for the comment I made; was not the place or time for it and I let my internet mouth get the best of me. But Jesus shit like that is one of my pet peeves.
"But you don't know my home life!"
No, I don't, just like you don't know mine.

Anyway, sorry for the rant. I'll go back to lurking again.

>> No.7725799
File: 20 KB, 438x77, Screen Shot 2014-08-01 at 3.27.21 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7725799

lol at voldie trying to kiss ass
I think the /g/ dude posting her personal info was too much, but there's nothing wrong with airing complaints. Also, plenty of people mentioned how much they liked the site.

>> No.7725801

I'm actally hoping a seagull will own lacemarket. Maybe it will help with the sales threads too. I never personally had problems with LM in the paast but with room for improvement I have a lot of hope for it.

>> No.7725806

>>7725799
Wait, that's Voldie?! Damn am I out of the loop.

>> No.7725809

>>7725806
I think she removed her last name from her FB profile, but yeah, that's her.

>> No.7725814
File: 66 KB, 199x204, 1389911891024.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7725814

>>7725788
Yeah it is not really appropriate but I still enjoy it.
But I do not think it is appropriate for this other girl to be all "Booohoo I cannot afford Lolita!!1" too. No one cares. It was totally off-topic, and attention whoring. "Look at me I cannot afford Lolita these dresses are so expensive for my special snowflake ass waaah waah ;_;"
Bitch please, we are in a sales group. Take 5 minutes to actually research the fashion first before you participate so you won't have to post such bullshit.

>>7725790
I feel you. I am sure a lot of people thought the same. It's like these newfags in my comm who go all "Where can I buy Lolita?? Is my-lolita-dress safe?? Can I order from Clobba???? Where can I find cheap dresses? Do I wear a blouse under an OP??????"
It literally takes 10 minutes with google to answer all these questions but no, they constanlty have to clog the forum with the same questions tht have been answered a dozen times beofre because they are too lazy. And if you politley point it out they go "Ooooh buhuu why aren't you nicer to me?? ;___;" like the chick in the sales group.

>> No.7725844

The woman who is organizing Rufflecon is talking to people about getting involved with Lacemarket. if that goes through, then at least shit will be aboveboard, she is totally on top of her legal game as far as rufflecon is concerned.

>> No.7725850

>>7725799
I like how loads of people have said the same thing but when Voldie does it, it's kissing ass.
(inb4 this thread derails)

>> No.7725856

Can anyone tell me how she was harassed? People have been saying 'she was harassed' but no one explained shit.

>> No.7725857

>>7725850
Bitch please, we already said we\re sick of the whiteknights. We're just pointing out someone from the board.

>> No.7725866

>>7725856
Adding to this. Does it have to do with that person from /g/ finding her 'professional' website bio? That was the info posted in the other thread. She has all her information publicly posted online.

>> No.7725896

>>7725866
From what I've gathered the "harassment" bit refers to people complaining about the site/her seeming lack of involvement on /cgl/ (it's gotta happen somewhere) and the person from /g/ "doxing" her.
Was it shitty that it was posted? Yes.
Would /cgl/ realistically do anything with that? Doubtful. We're not /b/ circa 2009. Also, that information is publicly available.

>> No.7726001

>>7724416
>>7724458
In a community where $2-300 dresses are regularly bought and sold, I think it should be at least 300+ dollars if not more, or just the number of listings you can have. I don't even sell such worth-y dresses (yet) myself but I can see this making the platform a real turn off for a lot of sellers. That and having to pay to list items even if they don't sell, I'm more in favor of a system like ebay where you pay only if the item sells.

I'm also wary on the idea of a membership fee even if you don't have listings, because sellers WILL lose sales on this for the fact that a lot of people will not want to pay just to browse the site. And besides that it's easy to get around by just posting sales in multiple places and doing the transaction through another feeless venue, or something like that. So I completely agree with >>7724527 plan.

However I do definitely agree that "business" type sellers (consignment shops, shopping services, brands/handmakers using the site like an etsy) should have an additional fee (and even maybe an extra fee to have their own storefront?)

>>7724472
That's bound to be abused by those just wanting to get in for free and then do no work. Mod applications should be out of good will, at least at first I think.

>> No.7726243

>>7725777
yeah what irked me about it was not that she was complaining about the price of lolita, but that she was being stupid thinking that LM can't have cheap or plus size items. I guess she didn't realize that the items depend on whoever wants to put their stuff on there?

>> No.7726502

>>7726001
I agree with almost all of your points. However, about the additional fee for "business" type sellers. I mean, seriously, how many shopping services & indie brands & consigment shops use lacemarket? I may be missing something, but wouldn't that be just a few people?

And yes, if there would be a fee just for watching & browsing thorough the auctions I think that many people would pass on the idea.

>> No.7726544

>>7726502
Chiffon rose, Raine Bunny Consignment, Takoyakico, and the Cutie Berry (or whatever their name is) trio all use it, and there might be more that I'm not thinking of. Even if it only is a few people, they're different than the average user.
I think that most people use the site regularly, so paying a small fee (say, less than $5), wouldn't put off users that much. Maybe I underestimate how cheap people are, but that amount of money for the access that LM provides is really reasonable.

>> No.7726577

>>7726544
Also, adding to this, the paid membership is more likely to weed out troll/flaky buyers and bad/cheap sellers than serious members of the sales comm, imo. I would gladly lose a few people if it meant reducing the risk of those.

>> No.7726691

>>7726544

I was looking for a different post because a friend said my name came up about something, but just to clarify, Raine Bunny Consignment isn't a business. It's my closet, I consigned it to my girlfriend because I suck at selling. We don't sell anything else except my stuff.

I was turning into a lolita hoarder because I was never around to ship out sales so I never made sales listings because I work terrible hours.

It was a problem.

>> No.7727223

>>7726544
On this topic, LM could be so much better if they could attract big shops to come in and sell their wares. Currently LM is very second-hand centric, nothing wrong with that at all, but if LM could expand to be more welcoming to brand new items like from official shops that would be pretty amazing.
Might be too much to ask AP or Baby to set up shop on LM, but maybe Lief for example

>> No.7727294

>>7725197
Can you imagine all the porn adds with 40-year-old women in pigtails and school uniforms claiming to be "barely legal" and "lolita"? Horf.

>> No.7727655

>>7726691
Hi, your name came up in regards to lolibrary. I had been wondering if Alice had actually done graphics or web design or anything at all on it or not.

>> No.7727656

>>7725896
No one doxed her, it's her bio page on her website, aliceten.com...

>> No.7727682

>>7727655

>>7726794

>> No.7727703

>>7727656
Did you not notice my quotation marks around harassment and doxing?

>> No.7727963

>>7727703
Sorry I mean it just seems fucking shitty.

Honestly I'm not going to get into it too much but she is kind of dumb. I'll just say that she let really important info of hers leek onto the web because of it. I won't say what or where but it's there and it seems like she's a bad coder and an irresponsible one at that.