I have made a few good print profiles for other authors models, and I have been rewarded for doing so.
For example:
It seems like allowing anyone to upload a profile to a model is the crux of the problem. It opens up the door to people that intend to exploit the system, removes control from the creator when low-quality profiles are added, it muddles the rating system on models.
I’m starting to think it should be removed as a feature, or limited to give the maker full moderation rights and control. This feature is no longer as desirable, especially now that the new version of MW automatically creates profiles for missing printers. Responsive makers will respond when someone asks for a specific profile, or changes to a profile. I don’t think they wouldn’t be hurt by the feature being removed.
Alternatively, although not as much of a solution, make profile points ALWAYS go to the maker. People that honestly care about improving a model will still upload custom profiles. But the incentive for low-effort exploits will go away. This solution would not solve the problem with model ratings being diluted by bad, third-party profiles, but it would at least limit point exploits.
Case in point, @PerMejdal is obviously someone that cares about making improved versions available to the community and puts real effort into the process. I would not want someone like them to be precluded from doing so, but it seems like they could achieve the same goals by using remixes. I personally see little to no reason to keep profiles open to 3rd parties.
4 Likes
I fully agree with all you said. I have had a few models where the people printing my stuff suggested changes or whatnot and it helped me improve the models to their liking. If they ask for a certain filament profile or whatever else I think most designers would work with their suggestions.
5 Likes
If the prisons were empty and the cops were there to take cats out of trees, then you could expect people to not download stuff you make so easy to steal. Instead, the world is full of criminals who would forcefully take your property in person given the opportunity, what would make them not download something, especially if there are no legal ramifications? You have a password on your devices, locks on your doors and pin codes everywhere for a reason. Don’t be so naive.
I wish it were different but that’s the reality of the world we live in. Not everyone is the same or thinks the same. If everyone lived by the same moral code, then I would be just as surprised as you, but alas, they don’t.
There is no problem with folks who create profiles, which is a good thing, and helps the community.
The problem is when profile makers upload collections of other designer’s models thrown into a profile of a popular design, to game points. That sucks for the designers of the other included models that the bogus profiles include, since they will never see a download from it. And it also pollutes the profile listing of the popular design, with a bunch of profiles that are not strictly relevant to the source model.
1 Like
Great work tracking all that!
I’ve experienced the problem of remixes changing my NC license, which was unintentional on the part of the remixer here. But it caused an Etsy seller to think they could sell my designs based on the remix, with the more open license. I was able to get it squared away, but it is just another headache. I think MW may now more strictly enforce the source licenses during the upload process though. The process of picking a license on MW requires going through options though, and is not the simple “pull down box” that is used on Printables, which lays out all the possible licenses (so it may take some trial and error to get the license that matches based on the source design license).
For the problems, which you demonstrated are real and going on freely, I feel that MW would do everyone a favor by firstly educating users during the upload process to make it clear what the basic rules are. For example, they could state plainly when uploading a profile, that any profiles that include models which are not included in the original source design will be removed, and repeat violations will be dealt with by launching the users printer from a catapult. They could also add that notice to their guide just in case somebody reads it (Print Profile Upload Guidance | Bambu Lab Wiki).
For remixes, they have an easily missed and very minimal notice when clicking on “upload”, where in faint gray text it says “I made significant modifications based on another model” under the “Remix” option. They could easily add some additional context under the “Please Note” section on the following page, to make it clear that low effort slicer changes and compilations of several designs, without significant changes, are not a remix.
It seems like they could do some very basic things that cost very little to educate users. It won’t help the folks gaming points, but it will make it clear they are in the wrong when reported. It also would help clean the place up a bit, so the designers and creators that really drive MW forward don’t need to deal with as many headaches from bogus profiles and low effort slicer “remixes”.