Thanks for your support on this matter too MZip, we also acknowledge your long contributions for our community and in this forum.
We will continue to optimize our rules and settings of the Exclusive Model Program and make sure the requirements and expectations are laid out as objective as possible(though you have to understand this is nearly impossible as everyone interpret words and phrases differently). A concrete and specific number might be a good way moving forward.
Thank you very much!
8 Likes
Thank you so much! Of course, I think this solution is more than fair. This kind of support is exactly why I value this platform. Thank you for showing that you care, and that you are willing to listen. For creators like me, this makes the difference. Let us work together to make this platform as good as it can be, for consumers and creators alike. With this in mind, I look forward to upload my next model this week.
As a suggestion: Perhaps it could be an idea to add another “tier” of the exclusive program. This would be alongside the existing MakerWorld Exclusive Model Program.Call it something along the lines of “Makerworld Premium Model Program”, which is dedicated to very high-quality and intricate designs like the Lunar Lander and the FPV Cruiser you mention in the guidelines? This new tier of the program could be a lot more strict on entry requirements or even require a review before being entered into the Makerworld Premium Model program. So while the existing Exclusive Model Program could exist to ensure exclusivity on MakerWorld also for simpler models, the Makerworld Premium Model Program would be reserved for models that go the extra mile. This could even replace the 14-day exclusive model program, which I don’t think is being used much at all. But do correct me if that’s not the case!
Again, this is just an idea!
I know you guys are slammed with scammers trying hard and sometimes successfully to steal/defraud for dollars.
You have a reputation system here that could help. The scammers tend to be low reputation and their accounts come and go.
If you could send these infringements straight to humans to validate in cases when the infringer has a high reputation that could help. Then, of course, the scammers will prioritize reputation building but the point is when humans discuss the infraction it gets easier to see if they are scammers or not.
The real issue is just coming down so hard on the people who are trying to follow the rules, or even bending them some. I definitely understand you want good models, showcase models, in the exclusive program. It’s just the rollout had unclear goals and the big penalties made it adversarial. Some of the distinctions feel a little squishy. Unfortunately it’s going to take a softer touch and more human interaction to sort it out fairly.
I’ve experienced the same issue this morning – my Fidget Cube: Angled model was removed from the EMP due to “concerns about exclusivity.”
I removed this model from Printables.com on October 14, 2024, in advance of entering the EMP with it on MakerWorld that same day. Since then, the model has been exclusively available on MakerWorld, with availability on no other platforms.
It’s frustrating to see it removed despite following the guidelines. Hope MakerWorld can set things right for myself and any other designers wrongfully impacted.
We definitely agree. A systematic solution is needed to help us differentiate and identify the scammers from those who are actually trying to follow the rules.
3 Likes
Good idea to use the reputation system! I’ve never really been a fan of the option of exchanging exclusive points for money, for exactly this reason. As a creator myself, all I envision myself using these points for is filament and printers. Of course, this can be different for other creators, espsecially the bigger ones. Perhaps it would even be an idea to only give the option of exchanging exclusive points for money to verified, high reputation users in the first place? In an attempt to keep scammers out the door by taking away the incentive of immediate monetary gains, while rewarding the active users that have built up their high reputation.
1 Like
This is understandable. A way to get around this is to require a review before admitting a model into the EM program. When a new model is published and the creator chooses to join the program, the model will be available to the public right away as usual, but to be admitted into EM and have that icon, a review will be conducted and it can take a certain number of days to get the approval or denial. Same review for existing models into EM.
It will not reduce the number of complaints because the complaints will shift to "why my model is not accepted while others that are not as good have been in it? 
But it will save the trouble of having to take away points.
On the point penalties, MW can be more clear as to under what circumstances the whole points will be taken way and under what criteria only the extra points are taken. As you can see, everyone is asking for special treatments, ie. exceptions, for their own case. If the impression is that as long as one comes up here to cmplain only the 25% extra will be at risk, then you are going to see many more people sending all of their models into the EM. Even if the 25% extra points are taken away, the model still gains more points because of the extra exposure. So the only reason some creators don’t flood the program will be their own conscience to do the right thing. It is never a good idea to tempt people
1 Like
Maybe your etsy listing was the problem here. I know, it’s not an 3d printing repo but the rules aren’t specific here:
Before submitting your models to our Exclusive Program, please ensure that your models have been removed from all other platforms and are Exclusively available on MakerWorld.
https://www.etsy.com/at/listing/1683889040/fidget-infinity-wurfel-o-3d-gedruckt-o
1 Like
Current Exclusive Model Guidelines are still quite subjective with couple unnecessary “generic recommendations”. The examples you use are still literally contest winner models, the one highlighted here (Multicolor Headphone Stand) is not and is IMHO better example than highly sophisticated multi-component models 
- You ought to have a lot more examples or even page with dedicated examples of “good enough” and “not good enough” models. Would be easier to judge if you don’t have any algorithimc way of detecting “good enough”
You ought to be doing that from the inception of the program, especially for people at the start who went in and then realized “wait, my model’s not good enough, i want out” and voluntary tried to get the models removed…
I have couple suggestions: start by implementing discourse-inspired “trust levels” (or as @MZip put it “reputation system”). @MalcTheOracle had couple good posts about that wit good suggestions. Also - try to have someone browse the forums, there are handful of threads where users are able to spot scammers - you can learn based on the data there. And obviously listen to users’ reports - people do report scammers (it would be great if “successful report” notification went out to all who reported given user/model instead of first report, would be good acknowledgement to the reporters that their report didn’t go into void)
3 Likes
I’m not. I’m an interested observer but have not/never entered anything in the Exclusive Program because after a good reading of the rules it looked unclear what was allowed and what wasn’t.
I’ve also been leery of even entering contests but only entered one so far after being encouraged by others. The experience was fine with no issues. I’ll probably enter more contests based on that.
But on the Exclusive Program, I absolutely see why MW/Bambu wants to do it. It could be a flagship program with prestige for being accepted in and upticks on rewards if a model is successful. Really exceptional models in an exclusive program can help boost everyone’s reputation.
So as an interested party and not a stakeholder, I think Bambu has their own idea of what kinds of models they want but did not express it well especially in the rules. And there is the issue. The rules are largely unclear and it seems overly punitive to do penalties or remove all points when people were sincere about their entries.
The quickest way out, and the most labor intensive, is to first get that button so people can back out of the program themselves and just lose the bonuses. Then just go through and remove every model that doesn’t live up to their idea of what should be in the program. Remove the point bonuses, penalize the people obviously scamming who didn’t back out, and notify people of why they were removed using basic terms. 2D derived, not unique, not complex enough, not appropriate, or whatever. It doesn’t seem so onerous just removing the bonus. There would need to be a catch for those who abuse the system for exposure, though. Maybe take away reputation levels if that becomes an issue.
Models ejected from the program are totally Bambu’s/MW’s discretion and people will take it much better being ejected with only the bonus removed than losing all points. Tough nooggies for the scammers ejected with penalties.
Bambu gets a real exclusives program that has value, these kinds of threads can go away, and the remaining models show by example what they are looking for. Any new models that don’t fit can have reputation flag for a human review before Ned gets his head on a spike.
1 Like
Thanks, definitely a good thought, but all information I can find online is consistent in reinforcing that designers may continue selling physical printed copies of their models. My Etsy listings are only for physical prints while the digital models remain available exclusively on MakerWorld.
I wasn’t referring to you.
MW can bypass this “rules are not clear” argument if they require a review before admitting a model. They only need to ensure that their reviewers know the rules well. Creators don’t have to.
The 25% bonuses is not the only benefit of EM. Extra exposure is another. People will send every single one of their models there to get some extra exposure and points then back it out before being discovered. They can rotate their models so no one model stays too long. It will become a free for all, full of garbages, and will defeat the purpose of having an “exclusive” tier.
1 Like
Let’s see. So if one gets pulled over for running a red light, one can tell the police officer that traffic rules shouldn’t be applied because one has a good reputation as a driver? Or maybe asking the officer to ask around the community or church to confirm one’s good character?
There is no such a thing as reputation-based immunity. In fact, if someone out of nowhere tells you that s/he has a good reputation and is trustworthy, one should pay particular attention. There is a reason s/he tells you that.
Yes I think @MakerWorld should clarify if this is against their rules and causes your removal.
In my opinion it should be ok to do so, as long it’s not selling the 3d-file.
This you?
Haven’t suggested that at all. Please note how discourse trust levels work. You still get punished the same way for breaking same rules regardless of trust levels.
Clear, objective and ideally algorithmically applicable rules would allow very clear entry screening via algorithm and limit a lot of potential bad models and manual labour required to verify the incoming models. Also, it’s quite clear that bambu doesn’t have enough staff, adding manual reviewers brings no real benefit to bambu, while bringing a lot of benefit to people posting models when their models do manage to get in the program. Recent introduction of report reason related to model not fitting EMP probably also lowered their labour costs in regards to that, since now the models can be checked easier.
This is so obvious one wonders why they didn’t do that in the first place. I had to look and scanning the current crop of exclusive models the reason is that in practice the bar is much lower than their guidelines would suggest. It’s really quite low. The property of the “exclusive” designs is really just that they are exclusive. They aren’t for the most part creative, intricate and highly-detailed as the guidelines would suggest.
For once, we agree that the determination of if a model can get into EM should be on the side of MW, not on the uploader whose interpretation of the rules can be different, regardless how clear or not clear the rules are expressed.
I didn’t specifially say the review can only be done manually. It can be a combination of algorithm and manual review. Algorithm can flag the ones that it cannot make a determination and send these to the human reviewers.
Creativity, intricacy, and detail are highly subjective. It’s not easy to express in language precisely. Even if one could, there is an additional subjective layer of interpretation. MW knows what it wants, it should take over the determination instead of asking creators to make their own individual determination based on their own interpretation.
2 Likes
I don’t believe this is the argument. The reputation system, at least in the way I see it, would only be used to get an immediate intervention by a human to decide then if the model is appropriate.
It wouldn’t be a way to avoid action or even penalties. What it would be a way of is realizing that those with high levels/reputations likely aren’t trying to scam so a human could arbitrate immediately and nip these threads in the bud in many cases.
And the reason I spoke up is I don’t have a dog in the fight. I’m not upset that I received penalties or had a model rejected. I am only commenting from the outside - not favoring Bambu and not favoring uploaders.
