So how is this possible @MakerWorld ?
3 identical models uploaded on 25-26-27 July two of them on top 3
Am I missing something?
What really concerns me is that several thousand people have already printed this out in PLA, thereby actively harming their fish - maybe without realising it. But perhaps it’s also a cultural thing - in my part of the world, we’re not supposed to mistreat fish.
PLA biodegrades over time. There is risk of the material breaking down rapidly or leaching harmful substances into the water. Over extended periods of submersion in water, there is some potential for the material to start breaking down. And what do fish do? They eat it and ruin their digestive system in the process.
Although there are always people who claim that PLA can be used in an aquarium, they base their calculations solely on moisture levels (water) and fail to factor in bacteria - and when you Google that, one AI 3DPrint website copies the misinformation from another AI 3DPrint website.
I was wondering if the algorithm just hates me and likes to promote stuff to me that I have no interest in. It’s good to know I’m not the only one seeing that everywhere. I noticed that skeleton popped up as a top model across at least 3 different categories too. I apparently don’t have the skills to promote my models to achieve that level of success, not that they deserve it; it just shocks me what is popular sometimes. 
I have been using planters and watering cans made out of PLA for a few years now - which are almost always in contact with water. There have been no signs of degradation. But then, PLA is hydrophobic.
I think it’s the UV light that is the main factor that makes PLA prints degrade outdoors.
Waiting for Bambu to introduce “PLA Pure Thalassic” that is marine life contact safe 