Hello, is it normal that apparently users who have many models in makerworld are “protected” from bambu ?
i reported a user three days ago with a ticket and, i don’t know how many links to his models, which all violate the guidelines of the community. 3mf files are offered without any real print pictures.
i wrote everything i found in this ticket with links and was promised that something would be done about this user. now three days later all the models are still online and the user continues to receive points and boosts for models he never printed.
why am i asking about this ? when i started with makerworld, i did the same thing because i didn’t read the guidelines. as a result, my models were deleted and the points i had earned were deducted.
why is nothing done when a user is reported with evidence?
i have to say that the first response to the ticket came very quickly. i asked yesterday and asked again today, but there was no reply to my ticket.
so again the question, are users with many models and downloads “protected” by not taking any action against them?
Having reported several thousand models for breaching obvious rules I can assure you YES, MW/BL do protect certain users despite those user’s blatant breaches of obvious rules.
If a user has a few downloads on a model, it is common for MW/BL to ignore the most obvious rules:
No photo evidence
This usually applies to accounts that have employed obvious renders and sometimes tried to fake layer lines in the renders.
Those renders often do not reflect the model’s quality or even properties. Sometimes the models are disproportionately scaled in the render making users believe the printed model will be capable of holding certain items that in the real world wouldn’t fit.
Several people have reported different users where apparently nothing is happening. Especially when it comes to mass offences. Maybe Makerworld shies away because they could get bad publicity from such users. In any case, it harms the community.
It is also conceivable that the rules will be changed so that these things no longer constitute an offence.
that’s why they tightened the rules in the first place, i hope that bambu will do something about it through this further contribution. otherwise i will only show render pictures in the future and if they delete it i will point out the ticket
BambuLabs is not consistently enforcing the rules, leading to a two-tier system where some users are held to different standards than others.
For instance, a highlighted participant in one of the current contests has re-uploaded “improved” models, which violates the judging criteria that explicitly states:
1. No old models, meaning models published before the Contest Period.
Additionally, their entry lacks any photos of completed prints, relying only on renders and leaving it to those who download the model to upload finished images.
It’s skirting the rules if the model is “improved” and the no-photos is a-ok if the model doesn’t have print profile. It would be great if old model can be inspected whether there’s any improvement or is it straight re-upload.
I’d argue it’s better to stay within the rules and report offenders rather than becoming example of two-tier policing and pointing out hypocrisy in rule-enforcement. That way you don’t risk anything. Also if someone is blatantly breaking rules with no enforcement from MW: name and shame.
different rules apply for competitions, as there must be no real print image available
that’s exactly the point, that there are several print profiles but no real print image. i know, if there is no 3mf, there are no images to be seen, render images are sufficient.
i have hidden extra names and everything so that i do not openly denounce anyone, it is only about showing what i have reported and how and nothing is done. in the future i will also upload my models without a print image and if they are deleted point to the ticket and say that it is normal that no pictures have to be there. in the meantime i found another user and wrote in the same ticket, let’s see what happens
Guys, BL and MW only care about traffic, and those with renders/no profiles upload a lot (because they don’t have to take the time to print them) and drive traffic. They’ll be exempt from rules.
There is a two tier system, and most of us are down the list quite a bit. MW does not care in the slightest if it’s unfair. They could care less if you put time into you models, if you printed the whole print, staged it and then took pics. They only care about the traffic.
As @johnfcooley alluded, there are a group of “Designers” who’d rather pump out mass than take time to present valid models. It’s a shame MW doesn’t just admit they are fine with it and change the guidelines to take the real image requirement away. It’s embarrasing to keep prodding them about obvious fakers. They change the goal posts when they need to save face.
I’ve printed that model, I have it right in my palm, I’m looking at it and comparing to the “photos” and… Damn… You’re right, it’s a render, but it’s sooo good of a render that it’s near indistinguishable from the real thing unless I really look into it.
I’ve looked into “how” and I found:
This makes it hard to distinguish ‘real’ from really good render. In other topic I did mention that personally I’m fine with renders instead of images on model covers/images as long as it’s to-the-scale and so on and this is it, but the print profile real image is imho clear enough requirement.
I think @GenericUser suggested requirements for real photo, but I don’t remember them now - I think in print profile it’d be good to ask for:
model on print plate, ideally whole plate visible with purge lines.
if the profile has supports, then with supports still on
if the profile is multi-color and has purge tower - the tower in the frame too
I’d have to make my printer space more “presentable” to meet those, but I’d be ok with that. I do wonder if having the blender gcode importer thingie would allow to fake all of that though
I’ve worked on product photography and I assure you, making “levitating” objects in still photos is quite easy, especially for items that fit within weight limits of thin transparent fishing line more “telling” for me are the books.
this is actually interesting as an exercise before doing the print - as i mentioned before i don’t use renders i really like photography - but this can be very useful during the prototype stage, instead of making a bunch of prints that just become waste, it allows you to have a better view of how the slicer / printer will impact the design once it’s in layers, i’ll definitely be giving this one a look, if it helps reducing waste from the prototype prints i’m all in
then i was lucky with my persistence. they deleted 136 of the user’s more than 300 profiles tonight because i did the work and reported everything with screenshots and precise texts yesterday
And Bambu ought to be ashamed that users are the ones keeping Bambu’s repository clean and presentable. I stopped doing it for them when a number of my reports of obvious violations were ignored. I’m not wasting my time.
We aren’t paid to police their platform and when they ignore reports, one has to wonder what’s the use?
Out of couple reports I did, I think I’ve received reply to just a handful, yet the profiles got taken down, maybe it’s “first reporter gets info, subsequent don’t?”
You might be onto something… I think my photos are pretty, but not “unbelievably AI-generated pretty”.
more “telling” for me are the books.
- but this can be very useful during the prototype stage, instead of making a bunch of prints that just become waste, it allows you to have a better view of how the slicer / printer will impact the design once it’s in layers, i’ll definitely be giving this one a look, if it helps reducing waste from the prototype prints i’m all in 
