Contest results a bit underwhelming and questionable

Hey everyone!

I can’t be the only one who is not impressed with the results of “Dragon Year” contest results, am I?

Not to say anything bad about the designs that were chosen as top 3 and then the next 15 for great entry. However, from 1000 entries, I could find tons of better designs based on anything starting from engagement, model difficulty and also how good the photos/descriptions and overall presentation of the design was made.

For example, the third place winner. sorry but what made it better than the 15 “exceptional entry” designs? It was not more complex than the 15 designs bellow it. It had less engagement than half of the designs from the 15 bellow it. and it’s just a rectangle with text on it.

What I am saying. it would be great that MakerWorld would be transparent and let the community know how these designs are evaluated, because just looking at them, the 3rd place winner is definitely not even to be considered in top 20 (my opinion of course). There are many designs that were left out of top 18 that were better than the 3rd place winner. Again, that’s just my opinion, but I don’t believe that I am the only one who thinks so.

Hoping to explanation how the winners are chosen for the future contests.

Best reagrds,


From the judging criteria:

Consider what other people would find useful

I’d argue that the 3rd place red envelope entry is extremely useful during Chinese New Year so is perhaps a worthy winner in this particular contest.

1 Like

That red envelope is one of the more useful designs among the winners…I’d say its fair

I am not saying that it is not useful. however - “Consider what other people would find useful” can be judged by how many people downloaded it. and there are multiple entries with 2x or even 3x the downloads compared to the envelope.

I agree that I missed the whole thing that it could be very useful for the Chinese New Year, I will admit that - so it’s way more useful than I made it sound like in my original post.

Also, the contest was Year of Dragon not specifically “Chinese New Year”, but I will admit that it makes more sense for the chose winners, however I still believe that there are other designs in “exceptional entries” that were better than the envelope.

Disclaimer: I do not have a design of my own that I would say earned a place in the top 50. I just stand with the designers who spent hours and hours on designing something that was proven to be loved by community (over 1500 or even 2000 downloads) and then end up getting beaten by an envelope that’s arguably requires 10-15 minutes to design.

I already made some additional comments on the other response. however I also wanted to add about that “more useful than others” part. the envelope is only useful for people who know the language and celebrate the Chinese New Year. For example, people from Europe have 0 use for such envelope so it because useless. On the other hand, the BambuLab is Chinese company so I guess it makes sense that they are focusing on designers and designs more related to that.

Disclaimer: thanks to your and Nadnerb33’s answers I agree that the red envelope is more deserving of the top 18 than I previously stated.

agree with your viewpoint. It’s regrettable that a design that has been in existence for at least 10 years and is priced at only 0.9 dollars can secure the third position. 3D printing should not be used for crude imitations of existing products.


While there may be more popular models, and from my perspective better models in this contest - I appreciate that non-popular objects also have a chance to win.

Anyways, it would be awesome to have a short reason why a model was chosen. Then, we still can disagree on the reason, but it may shed some light into the darkness.

Disclaimer: I have no objects in this contest.

1 Like

yea i like it that models that have 100- downloads can win too

I agree, some transparency would be nice.

Basing it on downloads makes it easy to “game” the system.

The only way they could have considered downloads would have been to have explicitly said they would not be considered, and then actually considering them.

Then of course, everyone would complain that they’d changed the rules.

There would have been no criteria that was guaranteed to make everyone happy. If they were smart, they didn’t waste the effort on trying to make everyone happy.

My guess, they had some minimum qualifying criteria and chose randomly from everything that made it over the line. That’s how I’d have done it.


I would agree with those that push back on the criticism of the 3rd place entry. The contest may have not specifically been Chinese new year, but it was heavily geared that way, and that entry fit right in. Granted, it’s been 20 something years since I had my college course on world history, but still. I don’t know.

Like, living in the western world, we never referred to the years like that. Year of the dragon! Year of the rat! I believe I was born in the year of the rat though? Point being, it is not a European or American themed contest, so we don’t have the context to fully appreciate these things and what they matter because it’s not part of our culture.

Personally, one of the designs I was rooting for made it into the 15, and I was happy to see that and happy for the designer. :smiley: I printed it!


I will say, of the top 15 there, the ones that have the most downloads could be just generic dragon stuff. The charizard bust (Freakin pokemon?!), the dragon pen, the loong wand. That third place entry is much more specific to the theme and occasion the contest is about.

1 Like

Yes, I agree that it should not be “the one who gets most downloads / likes gets the win” and I am happy with the first selection choice - the model might not have nearly as much downloads as other selected models, however it is unique and complex to create such model. It was definitely deserving to win it or at least to be in the very top.

I agree that in Europe and US the Dragon Year means waaay less than it does for Chinese culture. And that the contest’s title image hinted very well that it’s meant to be about Chinese New Year.

However I still can’t agree with an envelope beating 909 other entries to get 3rd place. furthermore, it is not even the nicest looking envelope from the 912 entries that are there. There are other envelope entries in this competition and they are better looking than the one in 3rd place. The review time of 2 days to determine the winners might be the issue here - they probably did not look through all the entries and therefore better designs were left behind the line of top 18.

But this all discussion could easily be cleared with a simple transparency about judging criteria.

MakerWorld’s contests were made to attract great designers to this platform, for them to upload their designs FOR FREE, and what does results like these tell such designers? That their time they put in the design is not valued.

Of course more time in designing does not mean better design, but the point still stands.

It would be nice if they at least had a write up on why each entry was chosen, for the top 3.

I would argue though that I don’t think it’s good to attach the value of one’s design to a contest. There’s so many entries, and a lot of great ones, even amongst the spam. The judges are people too with their own life and experience flavoring their view. A contest is a good way to push yourself outside of your normal comfort zone though, I’d say. It can provide a fresh challenge on a topic you may not normally do. I did an entry in the valentine’s contest. I doubt I’d win. There’s a ton of awesome stuff. I’m glad I pushed myself to try something though. I think it’s pretty neat what I did.


Lai see (red envelope in Cantonese of which I am 1/4) are as synonymous with Chinese New Year as is giving gifts at Christmas. They are a huge part of the culture and given not just during new year but at all occasions. It is fitting that at least one of them made it into the top 3.

As to why this one was chosen over the other one, this is why I think it was so:

  • Interesting history of lai see
  • Both traditional and simplified characters as options
  • A unique window to show yuan inside
  • Bigger to fit coins
  • Designed by the actual uploader

The last point is the most important because the other envelope’s cover design was made by taking product images from Temu (as stated by the designer) and running them through hueforge.

It’s true that the clever functionality of the Temu envelopes is better, but it doesn’t take away from the fact that the images were not of the uploader’s design when compared to the winning entry.

Of the other red envelopes that I found entered into the contest, they weren’t comparable to the winning entry in terms of customization, uniqueness, and/or depth of model description.


May I ask where’s the results list posted please?


I agree, the reasoning behind the first 3 places should be public.
In the calendar contest 1st and 3rd place are copies of aliexpress items,
in the office helper contest a gimmick was chosen for 1st place instead of something truly functional and customisable. - I am a little biased here, because second place was mine, but I honestly think it is something that will stand the test of time - not just a gimmick that will get tired very soon and end up being replaced when the novelty wares out. And don’t get me wrong here, its a great and original ideea and I really do like it, but not a first place one in the ideea of this contests guidelines.
that’s just my opinion, and I dont have anything against other designers, my main issue is with the judging criteria that dont make much sense

1 Like

In the calendar contest 1st and 3rd place are copies of aliexpress items

As the 3rd place winner, I feel I have to defend my honour :slightly_smiling_face:

I did not copy from aliexpress. I can’t even find anything remotely the same from aliexpress. And even if there was, I didn’t copy it because it never occurred to me to look at aliexpress. (I also searched for the first place winner and couldn’t find anything there either.)

“My” calendar is a reimagined style of antique perpetual calendar that I created by researching the original (using Etsy seller pictures, ye olde patents, and an imgur post) and then coming up with solutions to all the technical challenges thereto.

I spent weeks prototyping to find the right dimensions as they are critical to how the calendar functions. There isn’t a chart or anything to go on. It was trial and error. Likewise, I didn’t have an idea of what the original calendar looked like on the inside or how the pivot worked. In fact, the pivot mechanism I created is something I’m particuarly proud of because it’s all my idea. Compare it to other 3d printed perpetual calendars and you’ll see that it’s unique.

Every part of my calendar had thought poured into it. I designed the case to split down the middle specifically so the face could have a nice texture to it. I designed the pivot so it was quick to print and didn’t need support. I designed the tiles so that they would print well and slide properly and consistently. I designed the stand to be easy to print and look good.

I also purposely kept the month plates so that users who speak another language could swap out the English ones. I even spent considerable amount of time creating month plate sets for 6 other languages. I also made the month plates to be printable using Make My Sign for other languages.

I also researched the heck out of the original flip calendars and shared a brief history of them on the model page because I thought it was very interesting and provided context.

Lastly, I tested the heck out it so that people who printed it could expect that it would print and work for them. I have over 1.4k in successful prints with an almost perfect profile rating (there is one user I’m helping privately to get their calendar working). This alone gives me a sense of pride because I worked hard to ensure a consistent print experience for everyone. The comments and the ratings makes me feel that I achieved my goal.

I poured so much of myself into this calendar that words can’t properly describe it.

Of anyone to accuse me of copying, one could argue that I copied the first place winner because mine was posted weeks after theirs. I didn’t. I’m a fairly new designer so it takes me much longer to make things. You don’t just have to take my word for it because I have design files that prove that I began work on it prior to the first place winner posting theirs. I also have four pages of pencil sketches as I worked my way through the design process.

Do I think my calendar deserved to place third? There were so many wonderful calendars that it’s surprising that I even placed. For me, the prize is secondary to the pride I feel in looking at something I somehow managed to create and reading all the positive comments. I am grateful and humbled to have been chosen all the same.

I don’t normally get all defensive, but to say that I just copied something off of aliexpress, is exceedingly dismissive.

Congrats on second place, by the way. It looks like a lot of thought and effort went into your design. I love that it’s modular and the clever use of bowtie connectors. I also respect your level of responsiveness to users by creating custom modules. Well done and a well deserved top 3!


@Wcad00 please avoid the judging and false accusations here.

I have to stand by @ExpectDeer here and also put my 2 cents on defense here.

If you look closely, the model deserves its featured flag and checks more boxes
than most of the featured models. It has everything from a detailed assembly
to troubleshooting - it simply checks all the boxes.

You are blaming this as an Aliexpress item unfair and invalid.
You would have known when you just looked at the history part in the description.
It well deserves its place, even if I would have ranked it higher - again my kudos here @ExpectDeer.

I want to quote myself here.

Anyways, it would be awesome to have a short reason why a model was chosen. Then, we still can disagree on the reason, but it may shed some light into the darkness.

1 Like