More and more ‘models’ show up like today’s flood of ‘maker someone’. LOTS of worthless postings are being made.
A simple ignore function for a specific user would shut off the flow or nonsense.
There are way too many of these and they dilute the value of the site greatly. It gets worse by the day, I suspect the real cause is the ‘points’ system.
Thank you so much, I had not seen that. Excellent!
Tested and it works. Much appreciated.
You’re going to be ignoring a lot… each one of those is a new account. It appears to be a spam bot… and not a very good one because some of the descriptions have the actual Json code instead of just “My first model”. I’ve been reporting each one as they pop up, if MW had taken me up on my offer to be a volunteer moderator I could be hiding them as they pop up.
Another issue is that ignoring them doesn’t stop these mass-produced models from flooding the platform. This is a problem for MW to solve. There probably should be some kind of stopgate in place. AI can be used to do some good here.
I wish they would take someone up on the offer to moderate. It is actually easy to tell right from wrong. I try to report nasty obvious stuff but it is overwhelming to do. If one could moderate, this mess would be over.
Unfortunately, it does appear that the entire site is run by good people with little experience in running online platforms. Sad, this has a LOT of potential.
Another usefull option is filtering out specific TAGs - you can find it in your account settings / preferences. Great if you dont want to see Labubu clone number bazilion or yet another pokemon / fidget, etc.
Last night they removed SOME of the “Maker” accounts I reported. @MakerWorld here’s the one’s that are left if you want to remove them. My guess is they are creating mass accounts to trade downloads or boosts.
I would not use volunteer moderators on a proprietary commerical platform. It’s a very good way to lose control of your community or have it subtly steered by people of unknown allegiance.
That business model is more suited to open source.
All they would have to do is create an account level that could flag and hide models and MW would make the final call if they were removed. Then if they didn’t like how the mod was operating fire them. When I offered to volunteer I told them I would remove my models from the platform so there wouldn’t be a conflict of interest.
The main goal of this would be so a bunch of spam (or porn) wouldn’t sit on the site for a full day until they came back on duty.
The hiding part is the part I would not be happy with if I were in charge.
Flagging is fine, and I believe they have something of that anyway, as they can count how many users have clicked “dislike” etc.
You’d be fine with the new uploads page being covered in porn (in one case underage porn) for a full day?
The dislikes don’t hide anything from other users or people who aren’t logged in.
Would I rather them hire moderators in all time zones instead of me volunteering? YES, yes I would… but I don’t think they are planning on doing that.
I’d like to see more and faster moderation, but letting random people not under company control do it, seems like the wrong way to go about it.
Then again this could also be a cultural thing. I understand that user-based moderation is much more popular in US culture as the user base naturally wants to assert control over their communities.
Why would they let random people not under company control do it? They could vet anyone they made a mod just like they were hiring them. They would be under company control, anyone you can fire is under company control.
You’re basing this on one person in the US volunteering to remove spam/porn from a site they frequent? That’s like saying if I go to the park and pick up trash it’s because I like to assert control over the old people who feed the birds.
What?!? Shame on you! 
How do you figure…
…only because somebody on the forum here suggested it, doesn’t mean that just anybody or everybody gets to have a go at it.
Pretty much like hiring a consultant. They don’t start getting a salary from you and of course you can decide to no longer require their services… it’s still all under your control. Even if they’re not under direct company control via a paycheck, because they are not “employed” by the company.
This honestly made me laugh because if I deleted my post this is all people could see 
When you terminate an employee, that employee is in a difficult situation as their income is affected. When you terminate a volunteer, they can maybe just laugh and move on. Therefore some people, such as myself, believe that you do not have the same level of control over the actions of the volunteers as you do with paid staff. If you’re considering punituve contracts that allow you to “punish” a rogue volunteer (as you would be able to with a contractor or employee), I would need ask a lawyer to see if you aren’t creating a defacto employee.
I see you feel that community-run moderation is a normal thing. For you it might be, but not every culture agrees. In some, you take vigilante action to fix problems yourself (yes, I used that V word deliberately to describe community run moderation). In others, you follow the rules, bring issues to the attention of the authorities, and let them deal with it.
I’m happy to leave it to Bambu to sort it out, however they choose to do so. Perhaps they will use volunteers, perhaps not.
I’m perfectly happy with flagging models, and Bambu can tell from the flagging, what’s seen as a problem. It’s possible they might invent a system to auto-hide flagged models as they do with forum posts. Which is fine, it’s much harder for a “hostile” agent to influence a whole community than a single volunteer.
That might be the best solution. I’m not sure what anti-bot measures they have in the signup process now but that could stop a lot of it too.
Wierd localization failure? Why would ignore be denoted as “Dislike”?
Re: moderation, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, this is a commercial entity, making money off their brand. If they can’t recognize that to protect that brand’s value, they need to be pay someone to do proactive quality moderation, they deserve to get inundated with slop and fail. This is like ebusiness 101 level basics they are tripping over. The actions you and I need to do is go get a nice poking stick and bring the marshmallows to the fire, not try to bail them out of a problem of their own design.
