I got my first one today. Not happy to join this club lol.
1 star rating with âOther issuesâ, no explanation.
I get 3 star reviews with nothing other than âMissing Model Parts:â when there are no parts actually missing, which is something people would know if they bothered to read the model description. I have done everything to try and make people read the description, even naming my profiles âREAD THE MODEL DESCRIPTIONâ but I still get the low-rating-parts-missing reviews.
I have reported this type of ratingg successfully multiple times. You donât need a detailled explanation either.
2 Likes
This type of scenario will never satisfy anyone honestlyâŚ
Iâll receive a 4 or 3 star rating from only 1 individual, yet Iâll respond within minutes most of the time and never receive a response. Yet itâs always something to do with the âuserâ 95% of the time.
This was my main concern with MakerWorld. The variations across everyoneâs printer setup is vastly different. Iâll never give a low rating without a detailed comment as to why or if the model simply just turns out bad or has bad geometry.
But I donât expect the same from othersâŚ
Mr. Operator over here sheesh. Donât find my credit score now lol
I agree the systems needs to be improved. Over a couple of houndred of ratings I received only one was truly helpful and helped me to improve my profile. And it was a 4 stars review.
I think they are multiple reason why the ratings are so poorly described.
One is most certainly the language barrier. The main language used on MW is obviously English. And of course not every can speak fluently English.
The second is probably the skills level. New first printer users who use only the Handy App. Donât have the experience nor the vocabulary to explain or identify the issue.
Thatâs why I think most of them just tick a box with a generic explanation like bed adhesion. Or more frustrating for us : other issue ^^`
I think it would be better if sending a image was mandatory. And the description optional. A picture worthâs thousands words (in any languages).
And it would be nice to have some meta data attached to the rating like: slicer or handy app, printer model, build plate type, nozzle size, filament profile used (k factor even if itâs possible ^^). Those extra information would automatically filled based on the print history. No extra work for the user.
That would solve the majority of the issues IMHO 
3 Likes
Sounds annoying and intrusive from an end userâs perspective.
So we want to make it a breeze to give a 5 star rating, but to give anything less weâre wanting to demand all sorts of data to justify it?
I get my share of reviews that are obviously user error, but I think this kind of thinking is going too far. Just in general, this idea of trying to force someone to justify or explain themselves. Itâs not friendly towards people and feels anti-consumer. Just think about all the times in news stories weâve heard about companies flipping out about some userâs bad review.
You canât control everything in life.
From what people have said, it does seem apparent that Makerworld is decently active in taking down reviews that are questionable, or are obviously user error. Thatâs why some of these suggestions seem a bit far to me. Like Makerworld already gives us a tool to address those ratings, and they get the job done. People do get those reviews removed.
Thereâs certainly things that could be improved. Iâve talked to users before who told me they didnât realize the rating was for the profile. They thought it was some general feedback thing on the printer itself, and just went to Bambu as general feedback.
I donât think we should make people feel like theyâre gonna get interrogated if they give a negative review though.
4 Likes
Just to put this into another perspective, these are the kinds of things people were complaining about with Bambu and itâs log files, and now you want to take that data and put it into the hands of any designer that feels slighted by a negative review.
2 Likes
In my experience, questionable ratings are removed within 24 hours of submitting a report and as Uhl said, very little explanation needed.
the biggest gripe Iâm having right now is the complete lack of information from the reviewer; certain models, especially articulated ones, require specific material types, chamber temperature, bed type, and printing speeds to be printed correctly. Sure, I provide this information in the description, but still, when something doesnât work, and they say âItâs messed upâ or âit fusedâ they NEVER disclose their setup, even when I ask them.
Itâs like if I see âmessed up modelâ reviews on two types, if they tell me it was printed using an A1/P1P/P1S, then I know right away that they should reduce the print speed, but on MakerWorld there is absolutely no way of knowing a users setup without asking them, and 99% of the time they never answer when asked.
I think in a future update, it would be great for reviewersâ printer type to be labelled on the review; I would still end up asking what materials they attempted using for some issues, but knowing what machine they tried printing on helps me to help them fix their problem.
1 Like
Hasnât MW updated their policy regarding this issue about three months ago, making a written explanation mandatory by rule? It seems like they havenât implemented these changes yet on the software sid. I havenât checked the reference myself, but perhaps someone recalls it. This might explain why reporting them and getting them deleted seems relatively easy.
Iâm conflicted about whether they should enforce this rule. In the larger context, I donât believe it will have a significant impact, especially compared to Printables. While feedback is always valuable, Iâve found that after asking for explanations and receiving responses only 5% of the time, I stopped prioritizing it. Many users either arenât inclined to provide constructive feedback or are solely focused on earning reward points. By not mandating comments, both creators and MW could potentially make more informed decisions about whether to delete user ratings.
Fortunately, I havenât witnessed any instances of review bombing, so it seems like people, including myself, need to set aside their egos and focus on the bigger picture.
This has been suggested here:
Thatâs exactly my point here! Iâm more than willing to help people who have printing problem issues, I even enjoying it.
But like he said most of the time people just rate without living any useful information and donât respond when you ask question soâŚ
And yes itâs now mandatory to leave a comment when rating under 4 stars.
But the implementation of that rule make even more frustrating IMO. Because in the most of the user just tick a category of issue and donât leave a comment behind it. So technically they have added a description. Like :
- âstrength issue :â
- âbed adhesion issue :â
Or the worst IMO
âOther issue :â
Without any description of the issue. So this or nothing, I prefer nothing honestly ^^
1 Like
I donât talk only about ânegativeâ reviews here. And those info should be visible for everyone, not only for the designer.
Those are useful information for everyone to know whatâs working or not.
And please those Info are not sensitive or personal at all! And nothing is forcing the users to post a rating. If they choose to do so and be rewarded for it, at least it should be useful for the community and/or improve the quality of the platform.
My print profiles for my designs usually get 5 star ratings.
If that is not the case, I would like to know what led to the devaluation in order to improve the print profile if necessary.
It would be helpful if I had the following information available:
- the printer model,
- any changes made to my print profile, including print plate and filament,
- changes to the users printer profile,
- one or more photos of the print and, if applicable, application of the design.
Without the information about changes to the print profile, a non-5-star rating is practically useless because I (and other users) have no way of knowing whether my print profile was actually printed.
Some examples:
- In one of my vase mode profiles I received the response that the object was not stable enough. Luckily, in the photo of the print that was posted, it was easy to see that the user had (accidentally) reduced the width of the outer wall from 1mm to the default value (approx. 0.4mm).
- My designs are often designed for a specific layer height to achieve optimal play with interlocking parts. If the user now sets a different layer height, it may no longer work satisfactorily.
To be faire, if they change your profile even the 5 stars review is useless.
But I get your point, and I agree on the principle. Thatâs why I have included Handy App or BambuStudio to the list of meta data I have subjected.
Because obviously is they are using the handy app they canât change the printer or print settings. That would also help to identify if an issue is specific to the handy app.
And if they have changed something other than the filament, bed type, and printer (if listed in the compatible printers). They shouldnât be allowed to publish a rating since itâs not your profile anymore.
Rather frankly, itâs my choice if I want to share all of that information, and I shouldnât be forced to just to give a lower than 5 star review. I shouldnât be forced to engage in troubleshooting with a designer just because theyâre hurt that I gave them less than 5 stars. That information may not be as personal as my social security number, or whatever, but itâs still my choice to share, not yours. If Makerworld implemented the sort of changes you suggested, Iâd wildly protest.
See, because youâre making it hostile to post less than stellar reviews. Youâre signaling to the customer that if they want to say anything less than ideal that theyâre going to be judged, grilled on it, made to justify themselves. Itâs hostile. I shouldnât feel anxiety about posting a negative review; I should feel free to express my thoughts, even if theyâre negative, without worrying about the designer coming after me, or trying to force me into troubleshooting issues.
I donât want to have to give all of that information even if I give a 5 star review. I might share the printer model I used, but again, that should be my choice, not yours.
I may not be the sort of person to go around giving 2 star reviews because I didnât manage to clean my bed properly, but that still does not mean Iâm okay with what youâre trying to propose.
Iâve had these annoying experiences before. Not specifically on makerworld, but having been contacted and hassled about reviews I left. Have had sellers try to take reviews down that Iâve made because they didnât like what I had to say. You know, to have someone try to force me into a conversation to address the issues, when all I want to do is cut my losses and move on.
Makerworld already takes down reviews that are obviously user error. You can respond to reviews and ask them for more information or to clarify. They do not owe you a response, or any other information. It is their own prerogative if they want to engage you further, if they want to respond.
5 Likes
now that one is pretty funny⌠how can people even rate models when they dont even finish a print lol ?
2 Likes
From what I understand, it auto 3 star rates your model if there is an issue with the print and doesnât complete. You can easily get that rating removed.
it doesnt auto rate the model⌠the person rates the model but cannot rate higher then 3 stars as he didnt complete the print. the issue is that makerworld rewards us for commenting and rating the models so people rate them amyways
2 Likes