No one else is going to take this on? So be it.
Once again, Avim, thanks for taking the time to respond.
What I don't think is being understood by some at SW is how essential the tools and communities are. As a maker who designed both, I'm sure you know this, but it doesn't seem to be filtering up.
Pricing transparency is just a
tool for being a better maker. It is not about giving us the specific algorithm and destroying SW's competitive advantage, but about allowing the maker culture to thrive at SW. You want people to take the time to design and print something rather than going out and buying something pre-made? Give us the tools to do so. There are ways of providing us tools while also hiding the algorithm, including using the back-end software to help optimize designs. No matter what, though, makers should not have to make and upload test-cubes (with and without sprues, oriented in a half dozen ways, etc.) to figure it out. I should add that they do so without knowing whether the algorithm is working as intended or if the price they see is an error.
But there's also the matter of
community. That's why the marketplace used to be so important. It allowed designers to show their work and, hopefully, make a little money. More importantly, however, SW was showcasing creativity and selling a vision of becoming a maker. The marketplace allowed customers to find something they liked. If they did (or even if they didn't), it encouraged them to design something new and exciting all their own (labor that neither SW nor most makers include when calculating the cost). Some did it for the vanity. Others on the off-chance that other people might like the work they had done enough to want a printed copy. A few had enough of the latter to build a solid customer base and make a business out of it.
Each aspect of that built community has suffered this last year, and it is a community that cannot exist without the core of experienced makers. If the makers feel like they do not have the tools and are being denied the capacity to realize their designs, they will try to work around it. Then they will complain. And then they will quit. No one will see their designs. Fewer people will make their own. Customers will go elsewhere. Businesses will close up shop. Once they go, especially with the lower cost of small-scale 3D-printers, will they come back?
That's why announcing expensive new materials has fallen flat (at least among many in the maker community). That's also why it seemed so ominous when you indicated that you did not want to respond publicly to the community but instead wanted individuals to email you privately. That's why locking threads prompted so much hand-wringing. That's why policing language without acknowledging the frustration that motivated it caused outrage. I do not doubt that SW never intended to slice out the core of the maker community, but that is what has happened.
Communication is the first step to build community and restore trust, so again, your responses are appreciated. It will take a lot more than that, however. To have a vibrant ecosystem built on the SW platform, SW needs to come to see makers as more than an asset or a source of income. I – we?— hope you do.