Just to add some gasoline on the fire.
Cover image
Printed image
And dulcis in fundo…
Hey, digestive health is important at Christmas as any other time of the year. If the “artist” wanted to proudly display their intestinal track as a “wreath” who are we to judge? 
The reason there isn’t a print profile is because somebody reported it, and it was taken down for violating this very rule.
I think OP is missing the point that the rule is not automatically enforced. It just opens the door for us, the users, to report those models so they get taken down.
Never did they state it was going to happen automatically.
Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit, is it? No offence. 
I explicitly address this, and my entire post is about it. I’ve mentioned this as a precaution in case someone comes along and writes exactly this. 
I quote myself from the first post:
I think its wild what people expect of these machines and the stuff they post. 3D printing only gained fluent MMUs recently. I feel the Vortek unit isnt anything new as people been doing that for years, its just one of the first few in a mass production setup.
To expect painted models is insane. Its not a requirement as alot of people buy Bambus without an AMS and even yet there is still alot of us out there that have older machines without the use of multicolour. I still have an Ender 3, 5 Plus, Flsun V400, Kingroon and a plethora more of machines that run without, keep in mind though i have one of each Bambu ontop of the old guys so I have a total of maybe 30 machines. Ontop of that, people buy High Flow or High Speed materials thinking they help the Bambu. Big surprise here, Bambus are amazingly fast, but high flow/speed materials dont help it. Its for older machines going 50mm/s vs your Bambu going 500+.
Anyway side tracked. While its cool alot of the innovation and steps forward that come from the Bambu machines have progressed and jumped the hobby forward. As someone who does machining, these machines still have a decent ways to go. Model theft isn’t anything new. Its been going on forever. Even before the internet was public. If you make something you are proud of MakerWorlds DEFINITELY not the place to put it. There are better places OR you just keep the model to yourself, build up a listing then put it all behind patreon with a license requirement. It wont be 100% fool proof and never will be. Internationally speaking, there’ll be a loophole somewhere that someone WILL somehow find a way to steal your stuff.
Ontop of that, EVERYTHING I see Bambu wise is in a Chinese website. Whatever you post here will get stolen even if its remotely good and be remade somehow to be cheaper. Prusa is still in the game, despite being so far behind all the time (none of their tech on a “new” machine isn’t ever “new” just reappropriated) because their machines dont upload what you print to a server and is monitored. Everything you print on a Bambu goes into a print history which if its not on their database they snag the model. Atleast so I’m told. There’s such a flood of crap i couldnt even tell anymore,
End of the day, none of these issues are new and the ones that are new we shouldn’t be complaining too hard about. Alot things Bambu has introduced is new or still relatively new.
That’s precisely one of the reasons why I brought this up and opened this topic. 
Users want to see what the printouts actually look like, not what they might look like. As in my first comment, the example with the fox. Most of those who create such fake covers with the most beautiful multicolored faked prints have in reality only printed them in one color or not at all.
I have to disagree.
Not really. Has it been more popularized recently? Yes. But it was not invented recently, even in the consumer sector. Stratasys had a similar filament switching system in the early 2000s, but I will not focus on these insanely expensive industrial machines. The first common multifilament system was released in 2016 with the Prusa MMU 1.0. (Which was admittedly not that great). The MMU 2.0 was released in 2018. In both cases, this tech has been around for about a decade. We can all agree, that in the world of technology, 8 to 10 years is a very very long time. Even in the world of Bambu, the AMS came out in 2022. In the past few years, almost every single brand has come out with some sort of multifilament system.
Not insane at all. I have to agree with @RetroSharky on this one. If a model is meant to be printed in a single color, it should be presented as such. Anything other, I consider that false advertisement. It just wastes time. To add, a lot of people do not have the skills or know how to paint a model in studio. Bambu has built an ecosystem that thrives in premade presets. “Press a button” printing is what they are going for. We have to support that because that is the direction that the industry is going.
There are plenty of multicolor upgrades out there. Having an old machine does is not a justification. That is a decision that you are making by having a machine that does not have multifilament capabilities. You are choosing that you do not want to print multicolor models.
It would be normal for some segments of the printing community, such as tabletop games. Most kickstarters for tabletop gaming figures will show painted models, and will sell better because of it.
Although I agree that it should not be a hard requirement.
I think the trend was set by Games Workshop, which uses photos of professionally painted models as the box cover art for their kits.
So far, nobody has suggested that it should be mandatory to display painted figures. Only jclermont16 brought this up for some reason, and out of nowhere. In fact, the call was the exact opposite: Show the model unpainted.
It also dilutes the actual topic, because at the end of the day, it doesn’t matter whether there’s an painted image, or a render somewhere in the gallery. It’s about the cover, which shouldn’t be misleading.
What is misleading, however, is when the cover is designed in such a way that you think it is a multicolor print, but it is not.
One minor edit: Show the PRINTED model unpainted, as the cover image.
A painted model can be in the gallery, but not as the cover image.
this guy’s images are all AI generated, and most likely, (not sure) most models are too. They have made most of their models in a competition, and if they win i swear-
honestly, lots of models in here are AI generated.
Those models and images do not seem to be AI generated.
The images do not have any AI watermarking or SynthID. Combine that with the other images that they provide. There is a low chance that they are AI generated. My guess is that they are being edited after the fact. IE, take the real model image, then throw it into an editing software to make it look better.
The model is a maybe, but very slight. Edit: Took a further look and it is definitely AI. Based on that, I think even the real model images are fake. Just odd that they do not show a Grok, Gemini, ChatGPT, or Claude IDs in the images.
@RetroSharky Did a good job putting together a guide to tell for the models…
100% AI for the cover and 3D model. The window frames are different. The skeleton head lacks detail. The lamps, or whatever they are, are completely missing.
The first models were certainly made by hand, but then there was an incredible improvement in quality within a week. That’s the most striking thing. No creator could achieve such a leap in quality in just a few days.
However, the other images in the gallery that follows, appear to be real printouts. Therefore, they comply with the rules. It’s just the same old issue of misleading covers.
As far as the competition is concerned, they’re just full of AI stuff anyway, so I don’t even look at them anymore. There’s no need to look closely. Just one example: I mean, the cover has nothing to do with 3D printing, absolutely nothing, just look at the skulls.
MakerWorld doesn’t care at all whether the covers are misleading or not. Otherwise, the rules would have been adjusted accordingly.
I don’t know. My first ever Benchy looked horrible and my second one was perfect. I learned not to print with PETG while using the model preloaded on my printer with a PLA profile pretty fast.
Surprisingly this was probably a good first error for me as I quickly started reading about different materials, setting, slicer, etc.. The failure drove me to learn and quickly, but I also wanted to learn so there is that…
I agree those models images are AI.
We all make mistakes - it’s only human. But it’s different when AI makes mistakes. These aren’t simple errors, but complex ones that would be almost impossible for humans to make. They would take hours to deliberately replicate. That’s the difference.
yes,however im refering on how the cover image, is the render, and also the fact that they are churning out quality models every day or so. Models like that take far more time, so most likely most models, with the color (not plain) is AI generated.