Low Ratings without description

[Josh-3D]

@Henlor

I think it would be better if sending a image was mandatory (especially for issues).
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 it’s possible ^^).

Sounds annoying and intrusive from an end user’s perspective.

So we want to make it a breeze to give a 5 star rating, but to give anything less we’re 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. It’s not friendly towards people and feels anti-consumer. Just think about all the times in news stories we’ve heard about companies flipping out about some user’s bad review.

You can’t 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. That’s 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.

There’s certainly things that could be improved. I’ve talked to users before who told me they didn’t 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 don’t think we should make people feel like they’re gonna get interrogated if they give a negative review though.

[Josh-3D]

@Henlor

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 it’s possible ^^).

Just to put this into another perspective, these are the kinds of things people were complaining about with Bambu and it’s 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.

[Dr_Operator]

@Josh-3D

People do get those reviews removed.

In my experience, questionable ratings are removed within 24 hours of submitting a report and as Uhl said, very little explanation needed.

[zuperbuuworks]

the biggest gripe I’m 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 doesn’t work, and they say “It’s messed up” or “it fused” they NEVER disclose their setup, even when I ask them.
It’s like if I see “messed up model” 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 reviewers’ 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.

[Uhl]

Hasn’t MW updated their policy regarding this issue about three months ago, making a written explanation mandatory by rule? It seems like they haven’t implemented these changes yet on the software sid. I haven’t checked the reference myself, but perhaps someone recalls it. This might explain why reporting them and getting them deleted seems relatively easy.

I’m conflicted about whether they should enforce this rule. In the larger context, I don’t believe it will have a significant impact, especially compared to Printables. While feedback is always valuable, I’ve found that after asking for explanations and receiving responses only 5% of the time, I stopped prioritizing it. Many users either aren’t 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 haven’t 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.

[Uhl]

This has been suggested here:

Printer & Filament Info on Ratings

If the system data allows it I would appreciate it if we could see the type of printer and type of Material people have used on our prints. Especially when people have issues with adhesion, fragile supports or similar things it could be helpful data to see if it’s a core x/y or a bed slinger printer but also if they’ve maybe used filaments like matte PLA which is often more brittle. It would make it easier to help such people, without having to ask every time what they’ve used.

[Henlor]

That’s exactly my point here! I’m 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 don’t respond when you ask question so…

And yes it’s 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 don’t leave a comment behind it. So technically they have added a description. Like :

• “strength issue :”
• “bed adhesion issue :”
  Or the worst IMO
  “Other issue :”
  Without any description of the issue. So this or nothing, I prefer nothing honestly ^^

[Henlor]

I don’t talk only about “negative” reviews here. And those info should be visible for everyone, not only for the designer.

Those are useful information for everyone to know what’s 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.

[ThreeD-Michael]

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.

[Henlor]

@ThreeD-Michael

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.

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. That’s 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 can’t 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 shouldn’t be allowed to publish a rating since it’s not your profile anymore.

[Josh-3D]

@Henlor

And please those Info are not sensitive or personal at all! And nothing is forcing the users to post a rating.

Rather frankly, it’s my choice if I want to share all of that information, and I shouldn’t be forced to just to give a lower than 5 star review. I shouldn’t be forced to engage in troubleshooting with a designer just because they’re hurt that I gave them less than 5 stars. That information may not be as personal as my social security number, or whatever, but it’s still my choice to share, not yours. If Makerworld implemented the sort of changes you suggested, I’d wildly protest.

See, because you’re making it hostile to post less than stellar reviews. You’re signaling to the customer that if they want to say anything less than ideal that they’re going to be judged, grilled on it, made to justify themselves. It’s hostile. I shouldn’t feel anxiety about posting a negative review; I should feel free to express my thoughts, even if they’re negative, without worrying about the designer coming after me, or trying to force me into troubleshooting issues.

I don’t 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 didn’t manage to clean my bed properly, but that still does not mean I’m okay with what you’re trying to propose.

I’ve 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 I’ve made because they didn’t 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.

[Kenny89]

now that one is pretty funny… how can people even rate models when they dont even finish a print lol ?

[Dr_Operator]

From what I understand, it auto 3 star rates your model if there is an issue with the print and doesn’t complete. You can easily get that rating removed.

[Kenny89]

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

[Dr_Operator]

I knew it was something like that.I’ve never been able to rate models. I used to think it was because I had incognito printing on, but it turns out I don’t.

Yet nothing has ever shown up in my ratings tab. I guess I’m not printing correctly or something.

But if I can produce a photo of the model I printed, I should be able to rate it.

[Mirkosa]

Are you using their print profiles? Models can’t actually be rated at all, only the print profiles. I am unsure if making any changes to the profile once imported would effect your ability to rate. I would assume it would, but I very rarely print other people’s stuff so I can’t say for sure.

[GenericUser]

Most of the time I download the 3mf and make the odd change for my setup, if I’m using the original file (modified by me) I usually get the Rating option. But I’ve noticed if I download an STL or ZIP off MW there isn’t any Rating afterwards.

[Kenny89]

you actually need to click on open in bambu studio… so that it uses the cloud to read the file once its done printing

[OzButcher]

great idea, hopefully needs to be a minimum number of words.

I just got a 3 star rating on a model with the comments ‘works’ lol.

[MalcTheOracle]

I just received a 1-star review for a profile I made for someone else’s work to add support for A1 mini printers.

The comment was odd.

What on earth does that mean and what am I meant to do with that?

His is an extremely easy print, it has a large surface are for great contact, no overhangs that cause issue and based on the extremely well-designed Parametric Box!

Requiring photos and full description should be a minimum for a bad review.

The model Rugged Box (mini)