do you define words like FAIR differently than everyone else, or do i just have the wrong idea of the word?
because if your attempt was to restrict bot accounts, it’s not very helpful if you only achieve this by cheating the designers. and if you want to restrict downloads, then tell each of your account holders that they can only make 5 downloads per day, but no, you don’t want that either, that would be crazy compared to other websites, some of which don’t even need an account to download and everyone would laugh about it, turn away from makerworld in case of doubt, instead you just blame it on the designers… great cinema…
1 Like
Let me repeat what i said before.
Don’t get so riled up, it’s only been a few months since makerworld launched.
6 Likes
I would argue that this change towards multi-build plate models also just leads to less organization and upload spam.
For example, I have an upload for Dog Kit Cards where I have about 30 breeds in one print profile as separate build plates. While I know I would get more points for having each one an individual upload, I did this because I wanted that profile to be a one-stop-shop, so to speak, for that design line. Before the change, I at least received a little more compensation from the people who printed multiple breeds, but now I receive none.
I will always try to keep all of my designs streamlined and easy to navigate from a user perspective, so it would be nice to see more incentives go to that instead of more towards upload spam. No matter how much you or I feel personally about the love for creating complex designs / multiple-variant designs, the masses will gravitate to whatever rewards them the best, and I’d like to see that be higher quality and more organization.
1 Like
Is beta now the excuse that we are possibly being deliberately lied to and thus deceived and stolen from? The question I would like to get answered by @Makerworld is quite simple: Did Makerworld deliberately integrate this mechanism, knowing what effect it would have or did they possibly not realize this mistake themselves, but are now correcting it immediately… Sorry, it’s manipulation of the raw data. The only question that arises is whether it was deliberate or accidental…
… because if it was deliberate, then beta is in no way a justification.
1 Like
I think you need to take a break if you’re getting this upset about it. This is a voluntary website that we opted into taking part in. It is still beta, and that is a very valid thing. Beta means beta for a reason.
Also, at the top of the rules for the points, it says very clearly.
“The Operator reserves the right to modify or revise the terms and conditions of the MakerReward Program at any time, without the obligation to provide a substitute. Furthermore, the Operator may suspend or terminate the entire MakerReward Program without prior notification or explanation”
We accepted the TOS of the website, and all of this, we opted in, with the understanding that it’s beta, and we receive rewards with the understanding that it can be changed or go away at a moment’s notice. It can be disappointing, but none of this should be a shock.
This isn’t like we negotiated a contract with Bambu that they’re now trying to change the terms of after we all signed it. When we agreed to the site’s TOS, we agreed to let them change it how they see fit without notice.
7 Likes
Please consider that we are discussing here, pointing things out and give feedback. BECAUSE it is BETA. I want MakerWorld to have success. I think they are listening. From all the model sites out there, I think MakerWorld checks the most boxes. If we can help make it even better. Let’s go for it.
4 Likes
Would appreciate it if the prints of other people’s models were also rewarded, i.e. more than 50 points per month. I have many models, but also print a lot from others (over the 50 points). Regarding my models, I have many models that take a lot of printing time, but are hardly ever printed or downloaded, I simply have no chance to advertise them, they quickly get lost in the MakerWorld world.
1 Like
We certainly should press on Makerworld to improve and give feedback, but there’s a point too where people get a little too heated, and we start going down these paths of Bambu is ripping us off! Fraud! And other such things that people throw around.
I deal with all the same frustrations, and I think they need to clean some things up. So, you know, but I don’t think Makerworld’s devs are up to anything underhanded. To me it seems a story as old as time. They built a system they thought would be amazing, but upon release people used it in all sorts of ways they didn’t realize and caused a bunch of problems. The site is live and they’re trying to fix these things while the engine is still running. I’m sure there’s a lot of issues and things they couldn’t have fully anticipated before launching the website and getting that real world user feedback that comes from going live.
3 Likes
I’m sorry, but I think I’m being misunderstood. It’s not about that:
The Operator reserves the right to change or revise the terms and conditions of the MakerReward Program at any time without obligation to provide a replacement. In addition, the Operator may suspend or terminate the entire MakerReward Program without prior notice or explanation.
This is, of course, Makerworld’s prerogative.
It’s about the obvious fact that RAW DATA is being manipulated.
and they have not officially ascribed that right to themselves, and probably not without reason.
In other words, the downloads don’t currently reflect your actual success. That’s what depresses me the most about the whole thing.
2 Likes
The data has always been a little wonky because of how they counted downloads for the purposes of the points. There was a change to that at some point that threw everyone off at the time, and so, it’s just kind of more of the same as they rework the system.
This point was brought up and Makerworld responded about making the analytics more accurate to the actual data. I’ve felt the view we get now is based more on the end product of the point calculation. That was within this past week, so I doubt they’ve had time yet to fully implement those fixes.
1 Like
yes, but if it is the case, as described above, that a user, for example, makes 15 different downloads from 15 different designers in one day shortly after each other. the first five designers are notified of their download and designers 6-15 look into the void because they do not receive a visible download, then I think it is unfair to designer 6-15… imagine that for weeks you are only designer 6-15. however, your model has already been downloaded 1000 times and yet you do not see a single download point for you. that means on the basis of this mechanism, the deed reflects the fact that you are only designer 6-15… this has nothing to do with shaky data, as you call it.
2 Likes
What’s even more concerning is their failure to acknowledge this as a problem.
1 Like
Yeah and they’re trying to combat spamming of downloads for points, and didn’t fully realize how things would play out with the changes they implemented (I’m sure). The download counts aren’t the raw downloads, but are a reflection of the points earned from downloads. Those downloads beyond that point aren’t being counted for the purposes of generating reward points.
It was brought up to Makerworld and they responded. That the analytics should show a more raw view of the downloads. They agreed. Not sure when we’ll see that, but hopefully we will.
Try breathing down their neck some more and see if that helps them respond a little faster.
2 Likes
Since you are here to participate in the game to get rewards, please remember that the rules of the game are set by MW beta, and of course they have the right to be changed at any time, whether it is in your favor or against you.
Whether you’re a professional designer, an amateur designer, or someone who just wants to make money, isn’t it the great rewards that attract you here?
Don’t say that your models are “free” for people to download, because every point you get is still equal to 0.0816 usd, even if you don’t want it, as long as someone downloads your model, you will still get the points!
But many people just care about earning points and don’t care about cheating accounts, they think it’s none of their business, the loss is MW’s business anyway, as long as they can continue to have points it’s fine, so they only come up and complain when their points are reduced due to a rule change, thinking that the rule is unfair and stupid, and asking for it to be changed back!
I myself am greatly affected by this change in rewards, but I support it!
I’ve seen a lot of cheating accounts that can get 1000 points or more in a week, and a few weeks later they can get a new printer and sell it for cash, and these cheating accounts just upload a lot of spam models, flooding the whole site, and leaving a lot of good models under the spam, and eventually MW will stop offering rewards in this vicious cycle, and that’s a loss for everyone!
After this rule change, the number of spam models has been greatly reduced, and the layout of the newly uploaded pages is much fresher, with many well-designed, interesting, and creative models that can be seen more easily!
There are three types of people we can be in regards to changes to the MW rules:
First, the Suggestor: Suggesting what you think is a better rule that will help solve the current problem without seriously affecting the normal user’s approach.
Second, the Observer: Observe MW’s rules, make the best possible response, and be calm in the face of all the changes.
Third, Complainers: continue to criticize the site, yell that the rules are unfair and stupid, demand that the original rules be changed back, give me my money back, and I’m out of here and so on.
I chose to be the second one. What about you?
4 Likes
Those new rules should in fact helps to reduce exploits. And that’s a good thing! 
I just have one question concerning the rule :
- Multiple prints of the same model will only be counted once.
If I update my model/print profile. Does this unique make count per user will be reset?
Because when I do a V2 of one of my models, I prefer updating the existing model page rather than creating a new “remixe”.
I find it cleaner this way, for me and the end user.
I guess the best way to do it now is updating the print profile for hot fix/minor adjustments.
And create an new print profile for newer versions.
PS: it would be nice to have a versioning system added to the the model page
1 Like
No, the profile and model ID remain unchanged, so it will not prompt another download.
1 Like
Could you provide any references or sources to support your claim? Tanklet mentioned something specifically about distinct prints:
We can add it as a new counter in “Analitycs”, for example:
- Distinct Prints
- Non-Distinct Prints
I haven’t come across any statements regarding downloads. And even if they did, why would they bother, especially if they classify this type of download traffic as spam or abusive?
I value your moderate evaluation, but based on my experience, and Bambu Lab is no exception to this, there are instances where you need to actively push for cooperation to instigate change. I strongly doubt we would have been proactively informed about the latest changes if the forum thread hadn’t gained significant attention and if people hadn’t persisted in seeking clarification through support tickets.
1 Like
Honestly, I don’t understand how this download limit is supposed to work in any meaningful way for Makerworld.
When I first started 3D printing, I regularly searched Thingiverse’s “Popular” list for interesting models. I downloaded and printed a whole bunch of them. Since the list is in descending order of popularity, I of course downloaded the most popular models first, usually more than the 5 mentioned here.
Applied to the current limit at Makerworld this means that the most popular models receive additional downloads, and the models further down the list receive none at all.
So the scammer will try even harder to use illegal tricks to get up the “trending” list.
Catch-22 for Bambulab…
2 Likes
Regarding account suspensions, many innocent users hope for fair judgments and reviews, rather than facing denial of errors.
It depends if it’s the profile ID or the model ID that is taken in count.
And as we are talking about make/prints counts. Those are linked to a specific profile more than the model itself.
So my guess is that’s the profile ID that counts.
Because first you don’t necessarily have uploaded a print profile on your model page and second if there is one, it’s not necessarily yours.
And most often if the model as a little bit of popularity, you will have multiple profiles owned by different people. So you can’t have a global counter incrementing only print per model otherwise this will be unfair to other profiles and thus the rating system.