Point farming profiles

So just so you know, I make it very clear in the description that I take requests, and that is exactly what this and most of the sports logos are, requests. I’m Chicagoan, if its not Cubs, Bears, Hawks, or Bulls I don’t want it in my house, and PLA doesn’t exactly work as fire wood. But if someone would like their teams logo, I’m happy to make it for them, I just ask them to send me pictures so that I can post it here so others can enjoy. That Tampa logo for example now has 9 downloads and 5 prints. I enjoy making things that people like, and I think its pretty cool that my work is now hanging on their wall.

Yes, I’m getting a bunch of points, but I wouldn’t call this point farming. Quite honestly, if I wanted to make money, there are much better ways to spend my time, just being an Uber driver would be a major improvement, and they get paid in cash, not gift cards! I do this because its fun. I do this because the models that I printed (which have the blue carpet in the background) are hanging on my walls. The fidgets get given out to friends. I do this because I really enjoy the fact that people appreciate and enjoy my work. And most importantly, I’m publishing quality designs. In my opinion this is what Maker World is supposed to be all about.

Just so you know, that comment is from the person who “commissioned” the model, which I made for free. I’m not a Tampa fan, I don’t want to print this, but they are. Is it wrong to take requests and create things free of charge? I’d be happy to make something for you if there is something you’d like in this style.

Your screenshot shows the person who created that print profile replying to a rating of their profile. Like the other person said, ratings go to whoever uploaded the print profile they used, not the model designer. That is the same person who uploaded that print profile.

May the force be with the honest :wink:

Looks like somebody’s report took hold. As of [insert exact date and time of this reply] there’s 0 models and print profiles there.

Hey Richie, I agree with Henlor’s assessment that it’s OK (well, sorta ok). It might seem weird to others due to language of the upload forms and the usual flow, especially print profile. You see, the print profile upload requires checking the checkbox that says that “This print profile passed my print test.” and “I have uploaded photos of my printed model to the photo list to show its printability.” What people interpret here is to mean “I have printed the model and upload my photos as a proof of printability.” One thing that I don’t see there is you crediting the user for the photos…

Ideally what would clear you of any accusation of wrongdoing would be if you upload the model with cover photo showing render of the end result (or photo from the user requesting the model with visible credit) and have the user requesting the model upload the print profile from his account with their own photos and selecting to award model author with print profile points… Which might be overkill.

Yeah, Makerworld was very busy overnight… the profile I mentioned earlier that was photoshoping fake backgrounds on other people’s pictures and just re-uploading their profiles went from 230 uploaded print profiles to 130 profiles.

1 Like

that person literally re-uploaded one of my profiles and only changed the colour of one piece (like you can’t do that in Studio or Handy already).
They also claim their profile is “solid single color” and “A1 Mini compatible” but the profile is unchanged, still 3 pieces requiring assembly and was already compatible with A1 Mini and therefore all other printers too.

Reported it, but so far no action.

I have someone point farming one of my models by duplicating one of my profiles and changing the colours of the model, nothing else.

I reported it previously when it was against the rules, they refused to act.

MW then announced they were going to enforce the rules they already had and added a couple of new ones, I will report it again.

I won’t hold my breath as we know how poorly MW can be trusted to act.

1 Like

Well you’re right that this definitely boils down to a semantics issue. If I take what they are saying literally then yes, I suppose I need to be the one who prints it. But to me the whole purpose of this is for quality control, to ensure that your model prints correctly. If I have someone else print the model that I created, then it passed the quality control test, and I never post anything until this happens.

The rules clearly state that the model needs to be printed and I am definitely doing that. I know plenty of people are uploading renderings and I have no desire to ever do that, even if it means I have to wait until someone (which can be myself) has the time to print a model before I can post it.

Sure. As I said I agree with Henlor and am mostly OK with the way you do it… However I’d strongly recommend you credit the photo author, even on the cover image. And maybe a note regarding user requesting the model? That should be enough.

Well, looks like MW acted on my report and deleted the profile, but the farmer immediately reuploaded it with their alt account :man_facepalming:

People seemed surprised when I pointed out this was typical behaviour yesterday.

MW isn’t proactive, they expect you to report each and everyone.

If you are lucky, they will even bother to take a look before they get progressively less interested.

I really don’t get what makerworld is doing… really… That Leifei is a copy of the other account. Makerworld would need only to visit the forums, that by the way are theirs, and check a few topics where most of the time all the information is available and collected by us, the users.
This is getting real tiring, to be honest.

Consider yourself lucky that they “looked” at your report.

That was the main reason I started this thread and I still hope sometime they will get here .

3 Likes

I noticed that too. Why it was so well received (and so quickly) is a mystery to me. But since I didn’t see anything suspicious, I’m happy for his unexpected success.

But what creates an itch inside me is the fact that it supposedly couldn’t be any smaller (wording now deleted), the tag “Keychain” is just not fullfilled and lots of those tiny screwdrivers have more downloads than I would expect.

Since I have some history with tiny screw drivers, I somehow have the desire to make a smaller one that delivers on that promise and dwarfs everything else by being even smaller. - In the likes of a “hold my beer” challenge; would anyone be in as well?

  • Yes
  • Nope
0 voters

Note: Sure, I know about torque and stuff … let’s ignore that as the rational beings we are.

How small can you go?! Would a dusting of micro plastic on the exterior count?

2 Likes

Why it’s so suspicious to me is because I also have a stubby screwdriver about the same size that holds 7 bits instead of one and I’ve had a grad total of 16 downloads on that model lol

The secret is social networks sharing, facebook private groups, telegram groups, etc. They come, they download, cancel and it counts as one download. That’s how these things get popular so fast.

But as i already said before, it’s not even his model. It’s from thingiverse from a few years ago and the original is all parametric. And there’s another user Sanja3D or something that has also been boosted a lot lately with the “almost” same model but in form of a keychain.

1 Like

Good point, I tried to clarify that here (of course, the rules can be debated and changed over there.):

@BigJon1378
That might be because of its open nature, or the required magnets. - Or the lack of promotion as pointed out by Square3D? - No clue, but with a dedicated thread I do hope to also create a forum for feedback on why people decide for and against certain driver designs.

@Square3D
I think you are right. - Now I just need by brain to act accordingly and lets me want to make social media stuff^^
I read your post and somehow forgot about it. A derivative of a generator without attribution … I would have expected more from Anton, a mechanical engineer from AZ :-/

Hi Besti, thank you for bringing up this topic.

I’m feeling really mixed emotions right now, because although you mentioned Bambu Labs doesn’t do much against this, I was actually penalized last night for allegedly gaining points unfairly, and the punishment isn’t minor:

- I have a temporary ban.
- Points were taken away from my account.
- I can’t earn new points from downloads, boosts, etc., for a whole week.

So, you might wonder how this happened? The truth is, I don’t know either. After six months of uploading, with only three models that got some attention, I finally earned enough points to order a gift card, which I did last week. Last night, Bambu Labs penalized me, and after I appealed, I received a message saying they might handle my appeal within a few days.

Here’s the situation:
Half a year ago, I bought a Bambu P1S along with three friends. That’s four households—none of us live near each other, and each has their own printer. Also, my wife here at home has a 3D printer, but it’s not a Bambu Labs machine.

We’re all on social media, and one of the three friends and I both design our own models. I’ve occasionally used an AI generator to create models and made videos about it, as 3D-generated models aren’t print-ready. You still spend many hours in software (in my case, MeshMixer) making the model printable and ensuring it looks good. “Good” is subjective, of course, but to me, it means I’d be proud to display the print in my collection. So, I optimized and printed all my models, including those created with AI.

Since we’re all in the same Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube groups and channels, we know what each other is working on. So it’s common for me to get likes from my friends, just like I do from other people in those groups. The only exception is my wife’s account because we live together, and we’ve agreed not to interact between our accounts to avoid issues. With two accounts on the same IP address, we don’t want any trouble.

Now I got penalized last night with a list of possible reasons, and the only two thing I can think of is that I have some models where I tell I used an AI generator to create the model (I also tell that I had to do a lot of work in MeshMixer before the model got printable) or my friends (the three of them) have liked almost every model I uploaded. Not that you get points from that—at least, I don’t think so—but I can’t think of another reason from their list that would make me deserve a penalty.

Of course, I sometimes download a model from a friend because I want to print it myself, and yes, my friends have occasionally printed my models to keep at home. But is that against the rules? If so, I’m concerned for a lot of people who share models on MakerWorld. Many of these people also share their new models on Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, or other channels, just like I do. So far, I haven’t even reached 100 downloads, while some have generated hundreds of thousands of downloads this way. Is that wrong? I don’t think so—I think they’re good designers making beautiful work. I’m not there yet; I’m not a good designer yet, but I hope to be one day. And still, I’ve been penalized.

The frustrating part of this penalty is that you can appeal it (which I did, of course), but it takes at least a few days for them to respond. And I truly have no idea what I did wrong. I honestly don’t know.

My guess is that I’ll have to tell my friends to stop downloading my models, and that I’ll just send them the files via WhatsApp or email if they want to print them. But that feels really strange, because what am I doing differently than all those people sharing their models with large groups? The only difference I see is that my group isn’t that large yet. But hey… I’m still a beginner.