SPAM print profiles

After noticing that some users, or rather always the same users, upload hundreds of profiles with the prefix “FAST” before the description and often without photos of the printed piece, I have added this sentence at the bottom of the description of my models, and I invite you to do the same :wink:

Warning: before before downloading and printing SPAM profiles (uploaded everywhere always by the same users), check that when ★ 𝐅𝐚𝐬𝐭 is written it is really faster and not 30% slower at printing and make sure it was actually printed and that the photo used is not a copy of the print from the original profile!


Mister “Psy”, the probably best known print profile spammer often times just steals his Print Profile Images from other peoples Makes. Unfortunately reporting them seems to do nothing.

1 Like

I just downloaded a print profile of the AMS filament button protector, all looks legit on the site until the file is printed. The file does not bond properly in the middle region and splits with no force at all. I do not believe this print was tested prior to posting. I set-up a new print profile for the button and the print printed out perfectly. Please people test you profiles before you post them.


@Venom - This is going become a common theme. Unfortunately, MW’s incentives reward PPS’ers (Print Profile Spammers) for doing nothing more than downloading an original Print Profile (that likely was tested) and changing it in some way and uploading it. As an original model designer, it is much faster to created a print profile than it is to create a useful model. Hence the era of PPS.

My models have PPS and there’s nothing I can do to flag them or remove them. Most of them are using my photos or a user comment photo.

Another type of MW SPAM is CS (Comment Spam). You can download a Print Profile and rate is 1-3 stars without having printed it and get rewarded with points. I’ve had 5.0 ratings after hundreds of downloads and then get 1 to 3 stars. When I request information about why the print was rated low, never get any feedback.

Yet, another type of SPAM are copyright violations. Right now it’s Christmas Models. I’ve seen users, overnight suddenly have dozens and dozens of Christmas models that are far more sophisticated than any of their previous models that trickled out at a snail’s pace. Photos of these models do not look anything like the photos of their previous models. I doubt these have been tested.


I’ve had this happen. I think its partially a bad start assignment design and part people want to get rewards for reviewing print profiles. I dont know what MW can do about it, but Ive long thought that leaving a comment for a rating should be mandatory, this might help to weed out people using bots so you can see the same comments going over and over again. Easier to spot.

I’ve successfully taken down probably 70-80 models as of today. I wish they’d lower the amount of copyright violations you need before you get banned. If I can only find 8/10 copyrighted models because I cant reverse image search the models to find some of them, you should still be banned. If you steal 5 models you are likely to do more. It is very normal now for them to take a picture from the slicer instead of the original model photo from the page where they stole it to prevent image search tools. Still many of them are very easy to find by searching the “related keywords + stl” and look at the google photos.

1 Like

We will add a designer recommendation function for print profiles.

The designer of a model can mark good print profiles as “Designer Recommended”.
A marked print profile will have a “Recommended” sign. It will be listed below the designer’s print profiles and above others.


The fact that you can get 100 prints of a profile before anybody rates it, then the first rating you get is a 2* rating because “the print lifted off the plate” is a joke. I tried to report them but nothing happened. Apparently its my fault the user decided to modify the profile to use a different bed and then decide not to clean his own bed. Next time ill try to ask them to invite me over so I can clean of their finger grease and install the correct bed requested in the profile…

But to the main question. Why is not the designers allowed to decide which profiles are even allowed to be published? We are the once that gets yelled at when someone uploads a 1 wall, 2% infill “fast” profile that will break when you try take it off the plate.

The other issue is version control. If after you publish a model and print profile and then later modify the model and upload new 3mf and stl files, all the other contributed print profiles do not have the new updated model. As the designer, you have no version control over their print profiles and I doubt they get notified of an update. I would like to see them get an updated model notice and then a grace period to update their print profile, with a new photo of the updated print. If they fail to update their print profile within the grace period, with the new model, the designer should have the ability to delete it. Version control is a critical function of model design and enhancements.

1 Like

Print profile and design cannot be separated. A 3MF file always contains both. With a very simple object, it is easy to upload the 3MF as a print profile including model and perhaps also make the model available for download in a different way, as STL or OBJ etc.

For complex models that consist of many individual parts, other options are used.

  1. You upload parts of the model as an independent design with a print profile, separating each part of the model from the others. You then have one design and therefore only one object per print profile.

  2. You upload all parts of a model as one design with a print profile. You then have each part of a model in a single print profile. However, you may need to separate some parts of the model for technical reasons. Then you have some parts of the model as a new design with a print profile and upload this as an independent design, separate from the original model to which it belongs.

  3. If you have to split a model for technical reasons, then it is probably clearer if you only create one design on Makerworld for your model; and you upload the remaining parts of the same model as another print profile (because the print profile and model / mesh data cannot be separated). Then you have several print profiles with different model parts for one design.

BambuLab must ensure that each print profile is given a digital stamp of the print object it contains. In other words, a unique number. As soon as another user uploads a new print profile, this print profile must contain the stamp of the print object of the model creator (i.e. the designer). Then it can also be reacted to as soon as the creator updates his model. His updated model then has a different number / stamp than the derived print profiles from his previous model. From that point on, you can then proceed as you wish with the other print profiles: mark them as out of date, give the model creator the choice to remove them, notify the profile creator and ask for a change, or whatever.

Also, the above options are all associated with different download numbers and points accumulated from them, which leads to imbalance between different designers. This also needs to be solved somehow. While one designer integrates 40 printing plates into his print profile and receives only one download for 40 plates, another designer with 40 plates receives 40 times more downloads if he uploads each plate as an individual design / print profile. To summarise briefly: a clear line must be drawn here as to how models are made available in order to create equality in the number of downloads and thus points collected. Or equality must be achieved in another way. Because designers are listed in search results according to downloads and therefore those with higher download figures are naturally at the top.

Best regards

In my opinion it is right that users are free to upload their profile, it is up to us to evaluate whether it is appropriate to print an object with 1 wall and then see it broken as soon as we pick it up… instead I appreciate seeing serious people which upload better quality profiles, or which in any case are proof that the model has been appreciated and printed.

But going back to spam profiles, as soon as the feature was activated I immediately reported a profile with a fake photo: the next day the staff removed it and notified me. The back office of Makerworld and Bambu Lab itself are made up of good people, they work as well as I would do in their place. Well done!!

1 Like

I would typically agree, it is a nice feature for users to be able to upload improvements to the profiles. But after uploading a couple models and seeing both the spam cyborgs and the average user it just doesn’t hold up. In theory everyone can upload whatever and its up to the printers to decide how strong they need their models. But in practice its far from it, its just a bunch of cyborgs racing to the bottom for a quick 20 downloads and a bunch of people voting 1-3* because they cant bother to clean their own beds. Not rewarding the designers because 1/100 of the downloaders could not differ a print profile from his own finger grease on the bed is not really fair and is not really creating an environment where people want to share their hard work.

I also feel like a lot of people give low ratings because of anger/jealousy/pumping their own profiles. I have not yet received a sub 5* which can give a reasonable response to what the issue is. I’m always left ignored or someone complaining that when changing to a completely different bed than the profile requests, and not cleaning the bed for 14 weeks the model does not stick. And if hes allowed to change bed and still give a rating then maybe he should also be required to add a 2mm brim if he really hates soap that much…

And I’m not talking about removing the functionality, just giving more power to the designers, there are some profiles I’m very happy people have uploaded, a couple from @Tridense for example. I’m more angry he choose to not upload profiles to all my models that were lacking. But that’s about it, for every good profile someone uploads, I get 10 bad uploads.

The model update notification is in our recent schedule.
A designer may optionally choose to send a message to print profile uploaders to let them know the model geometry update.


Thank you for this information. Please, just make sure they have a limited time to update their print profile and require them to provide an updated real photo of the new print. If they fail to do so within the grace period allow us designers to remove the print profile.

1 Like

Please take a look at the other post about the user that is stealing and photoshopping images to pretend they printed out the profile: User Spamming 'Fast Profile' is using Fake/Photoshopped Images - #19 by xsynatic

MakerWorld support took action and removed all of their profiles, but now they are active and have added over 100 profiles today alone.

Our support team is handling this.

1 Like

Yes. We will also add 3 report type for print profile in the next update:

  • Repeatedly uploading
  • No real print image
  • Use other’s actual print image

The points reward will be optimized in the next update. If a user downloads multiple print profiles (belonged to the same model) from a designer(or a print profile uploader), only the first download will be counted.

Model creators now have the chance to instantly deleted print profiles that do not have any pictures uploaded. What some people do to get around is to just upload a picture of the Slicer/plate preview. That way the Model creator cannot delete the Profile anymore, even though it still has no image of the actual printed model.

Would the change you mentioned above be the solution then? Instead of being able to delete it myself i have to file a report?

i just came across this note on a print profile from someone on somebody else’s model. Interesting.

This checkbox has been enabled for a few days now.

When you add a profile you may choose to give all rewards to the designer instead.

I’d love to see a split option instead of all/nothing, then I think people may actually use it.