"Would you like this set? ... all you have to do is click the support button on the right, it's free!"

Wrong...

Fine, but wake me up the day you will see anything remotely good on a screenshot of the LDD with those backgrounds

Okay, here's one, freshly arrived. I agree the background does it no favors, and the project itself isn't exactly a knockout, perhaps, but I think it certainly qualifies as at least decent, or "remotely good", in both concept and execution.

I freely admit I don't expect it to get all that far in the voting with those backgrounds, but it's not an inherently bad project by any means otherwise.

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/150916

Egads, the concept on this one is atrocious.

Oh god... my 7 year old brother loves those apps, but they're so very annoying! Oh yeah, and the build sucks epically.

Found something awful myself, which isn't LDD, but seems like something a 10-year-old would throw together in 10 minutes from a random pile of pieces: https://ideas.lego.com/projects/151064

Okay, now I'm certain that Lightningtiger, Clint, and My Temple are all bot accounts. They always post the same thing on EVERY project that comes in, almost instantaneously.

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/150916

Egads, the concept on this one is atrocious.

That's kids media, right? What adult would submit this? None, likely, so it's probably a kid's submission, which is against the rules.

Oh god... my 7 year old brother loves those apps, but they're so very annoying! Oh yeah, and the build sucks epically.

Found something awful myself, which isn't LDD, but seems like something a 10-year-old would throw together in 10 minutes from a random pile of pieces: https://ideas.lego.com/projects/151064

That is awful. That should not have made it through their preliminary process.

Okay, here's one, freshly arrived. I agree the background does it no favors, and the project itself isn't exactly a knockout, perhaps, but I think it certainly qualifies as at least decent, or "remotely good", in both concept and execution.

well ok, it's not atrocious..

Most of these are simply what I categorize as "Little Billy Discovers LDD!" When they have not yet grasped many of the finer points of the software and are instead using it Minecraft like to turn little squares into bigger squares. That surely must be shared.

A few however make me weep for humanity.

Most of these are simply what I categorize as "Little Billy Discovers LDD!" When they have not yet grasped many of the finer points of the software and are instead using it Minecraft like to turn little squares into bigger squares. That surely must be shared.

A few however make me weep for humanity.

They also have not grasped that Ideas is a place for adults to post their projects, not kids.

They also have not grasped that Ideas is a place for adults to post their projects, not kids.

True, although I suspect that most of the kids who do post a project here honestly believe they have a chance of having it made into a set. Along with many of us, it would be their dream to have that happen. The disconnect is that they have no idea how others perceive their project and that the chance of success is virtually zero.

In theory, if a child led project did get 10,000 votes, I suppose it would be during the review phase itself that the project was disqualified, or simply not approved without the reason given. Now that they are posting a Q@A session for the designers who reach the 10,000 plateau, it would really be interesting to see how TLG handled it if that is when they find out an underage project makes it into review. Yeah, I know the likehood is small, but there are a lot of smart kids out there. Eventually, someone could figure out how to get 10,000 of their friends to vote for a project.

True, although I suspect that most of the kids who do post a project here honestly believe they have a chance of having it made into a set. Along with many of us, it would be their dream to have that happen. The disconnect is that they have no idea how others perceive their project and that the chance of success is virtually zero.

In theory, if a child led project did get 10,000 votes, I suppose it would be during the review phase itself that the project was disqualified, or simply not approved without the reason given. Now that they are posting a Q@A session for the designers who reach the 10,000 plateau, it would really be interesting to see how TLG handled it if that is when they find out an underage project makes it into review. Yeah, I know the likehood is small, but there are a lot of smart kids out there. Eventually, someone could figure out how to get 10,000 of their friends to vote for a project.

Note that it's officially open to kids as young as 13. On the off chance someone that old (young) actually had a project get through, there'd be no problem.

If a project were discovered after approval to have been created by someone younger than 13, I suspect they'd regretfully cancel it, citing the rules violation. That said, it's unlikely to happen - it's darn tough to even make it to review in the first place. After all, there've been well over 18,000 projects submitted to CUUSOO / Ideas over the years, and only about a hundred or so have gotten all the way to 10,000 votes. More importantly, only 17 have ever actually been approved, so far. That's an approval rate of fewer than 1 in a thousand.

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/151081

Wow, just wow. Didn't even bother to put wheels on the skateboard. Walls are only 3 blocks tall, and lacks any sort of detailing.

This topic is the best , thanks for posting this.

About the last one:

"would be a great introduction for kids into Lego" LOL, even juniors has more details.

"Would be a good addition to a collection" Are you sure about that?

Edited August 18, 20168 yr by LXF

Note that it's officially open to kids as young as 13. On the off chance someone that old (young) actually had a project get through, there'd be no problem.

True, but that's when kids become teens. So I guess it's open to teens and adults. But a lot of projects look like they were made by kids (as in younger than 13). It would be nice if there was some way to avoid this.

It would be hard to try and call a project out based on apparent age of the creator, especially without stepping on some toes. In most cases, that submission of a Boeing 747 made out of 46 2x4's in various primary colors is probably the work of a preteen, however I would hate to call it out and have it end up being a special needs person in their teens.

The likelihood of having one of these beauties making it into review is slim, however if you had someone who could not really design something be backed up by someone with ability to round up 10,000 votes, then it is in the realm of possibility. At that point, the review board would find out when they interview the designer.

After all, there've been well over 18,000 projects submitted to CUUSOO / Ideas over the years, and only about a hundred or so have gotten all the way to 10,000 votes. More importantly, only 17 have ever actually been approved, so far. That's an approval rate of fewer than 1 in a thousand.

I'd say it's less than this. Let's face it, most of the projects are horrible, and their true chance of getting 10k votes is absolutely zero.

So that leaves the good projects, I'd say a few hundreds, perhaps 1000 at best. So if someone who's not dellusional picks the right subject & posts a good project, *and* promotes it enough, I'd say his chances are 1 in 50 to 100. This last bit of randomness would be the one of that subject being picked by social media, guaranteeing enough votes, and then being approved by Lego, which is too kinda unpredictable. The rest isn't really random, it's up to the project's quality, so I wouldn't really say "chances" here.

(still, I maintain that Lego Ideas is a great place to be seen, and that no one should be posting entries for any other reason)

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/151081

Wow, just wow. Didn't even bother to put wheels on the skateboard. Walls are only 3 blocks tall, and lacks any sort of detailing.

As usual those 3 supporters are supporting & following every single project, I wonder what's going on. Why would anyone bother with bots in there?

Would they be doing this just to get votes in return? Doesn't seem to work very well.

Edited August 18, 20168 yr by anothergol

(still, I maintain that Lego Ideas is a great place to be seen, and that no one should be posting entries for any other reason)

I'm not sure I follow. Nobody should be posting entries for any other reason than to be made into an official set (and they really shouldn't bother unless their project is at LEGO set standards).

Lightningtiger is not a bot; he's a user here who has an ongoing Aussie-style town project that he occasionally posts updates on.

I hardly know what the point is of going to a website specifically to be upset by kids uploading typical "my first MOC" projects. Wouldn't it just be easier to support the projects you like rather than posting a running commentary about things that don't affect you at all, especially when that commentary will have no effect on the people who post low-quality projects?

It's also posted in the project guidelines that Ideas projects that are similar to LEGO products probably won't pass review, and projects based on active LEGO licenses probably won't pass review, so I don't know what anyone would hope to achieve by posting a UCS AT-ST project.

Edited August 18, 20168 yr by jamesn

I hardly know what the point is of going to a website specifically to be upset by kids uploading typical "my first MOC" projects. Wouldn't it just be easier to support the projects you like rather than posting a running commentary about things that don't affect you at all, especially when that commentary will have no effect on the people who post low-quality projects?

It's also posted in the project guidelines that Ideas projects that are similar to LEGO products probably won't pass review, and projects based on active LEGO licenses probably won't pass review, so I don't know what anyone would hope to achieve by posting a UCS AT-ST project.

I don't go to Ideas specifically to be upset by kids projects. I go to look for good projects to support. While I am there, I see too many of these kids projects and it annoys me. Kids projects violate the guidelines. They don't belong on Ideas. They belong here. And it does affect me, as the clutter makes it more difficult to navigate the site.

I also agree that a UCS AT-ST project is inappropriate for Ideas. Like the kids projects, they violate the guidelines. They are on the other end of the spectrum of what is acceptable. Beautiful as they may be, they are not viable Ideas projects. They do not belong on Ideas. They belong on an AFOL site for showcasing MOCs, or here.

I hardly know what the point is of going to a website specifically to be upset by kids uploading typical "my first MOC" projects. Wouldn't it just be easier to support the projects you like rather than posting a running commentary about things that don't affect you at all, especially when that commentary will have no effect on the people who post low-quality projects?

I know I didn't start this thread to be angry at mediocre projects, but to have fun with the terribad ones.

You can't ignore the existence of mediocre projects (which are the majority), they're crowding the website, making it harder to spot the good projects. But it's not about pointing out mediocre projects, those are boring. Sometimes however it's so bad it's good.

Here's an example of what most projects are: https://ideas.lego.com/projects/150872

It's not terribad, not enough to be funny for it. It's not amazing either. We all know it has zero chance to pass. That's a "meh" project you just ignore & move on.

It's also posted in the project guidelines that Ideas projects that are similar to LEGO products probably won't pass review, and projects based on active LEGO licenses probably won't pass review, so I don't know what anyone would hope to achieve by posting a UCS AT-ST project.

There is definitely a point in posting or voting. Cavegod posted his UCS AT-AT, I voted for it. It was more than obvious that it had no chance, but still, it sent a message to Lego: people would buy an UCS AT-AT. Maybe not Cavegod's, but if they managed to make one safe enough..

Also the keyword is "probably". Lego only says that it has less chances, that's all.

But anyway, anyone who posts an entry & really hopes to have it produced as a set, is delusional. If it passes, it's amazing, but it's most likely not gonna happen.

To me, Lego Ideas works like this: people show their MOCs which they would agree Lego to produce (not every MOCer would, so this is where the difference with, say MOCPages, is). It's not about showing your MOCs which you *want* Lego to produce (again, because the chances of happening are very very thin), but which you would *agree* Lego to produce.

I got 2k votes for my entry, I certainly don't consider it a failure.

I also agree that a UCS AT-ST project is inappropriate for Ideas. Like the kids projects, they violate the guidelines.

Really? Show me which ones.

Here, I read:

"We welcome projects based on current licenses like Star Wars, Superheroes, Disney, etc., However, these active licenses are likely to have similar concepts already in the pipeline."

So it says it in clear, projects based on existing licenses are welcome.

Edited August 19, 20168 yr by anothergol

Another one (I'd say it's a clear troll):

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/119125

I'm starting to see a correlation between the yellow background usage and the poor quality of the sets ...

Btw: this very creator spammed LEGO Ideas with 10 sets all of the same "quality".

Edited August 19, 20168 yr by blackie

Some of these were clearly posted by kids I'd say

Edited August 19, 20168 yr by Robert8

That Narnia set actually does have a fair bit of thought put into it... walls fold down to make a beach, that's clever... I mean, the build sucks, but it's clearly not someone's first time in LDD. Perhaps there should just be a filter for "anything with that yellow background must pass further inspection," because there's definitely a correlation between that ugly background and bad models. I dunno about a troll, there would be something more obvious about it if that were the case. All of that guy's other projects are similar. I wonder what the story is there...

EDIT: Egads, that's awful... is this from the guy who keeps uploading sets of 6 crappy clone build Bionicles? https://ideas.lego.com/projects/151248

It's just a tan box. Would LEGO make something like this, it would be a proper Marvel-style playset. https://ideas.lego.com/projects/150368

Edited August 20, 20168 yr by PicnicBasketSam

Just my two cents on the "negativity" and calls for this thread to end...

And are you seriously going to tell me this threat isn't about bashing other people's ideas?

Yes and no. Some of these projects are hilariously bad. So bad that the authors MUST understand how bad they are unless they're under the age of 8 - in which case they shouldn't be posting. I mean, seriously... I've literally seen a baseplate with a minifigure standing on it. Can you imagine a mature person (or mature enough - 13+) actually defending that, getting indignant and saying "Hey, that's not nice! I put a lot of work into that!"

I don't care for people posting the moderate projects here - just because they won't make it doesn't put them in the "best of the worst" category. If people posted some of these moderate ones on Eurobricks, they would likely get a lot of love, or at least constructive criticism.

One thing I find funny is that, in fact, if we go all the way back to post 23 (the tumblr link), they actually posted this as one of the worst. Does the guy that put that there feel like an idiot now? I hope so. A good example of going to far to bash an idea "for laughs" when you don't need to look further than the many bad ones that actually get posted every day.

I'm enjoying the really bad models.... I don't really think I need them, I do visit Ideas from time to time and see them all over, and I do find it annoying that these obviously bad ones, so it's nice to turn it into laughs. I don't go past the "discover" page when I see bad ones - I should, because sometimes the descriptions and comments are gold. I don't know if I should laugh or cry about lighteningtiger.

So yes, there's some negativity there, but I don't want this thread to stop - I just think it should focus on the projects that fit the title "The best of the worst."

Edited August 20, 20168 yr by fred67

But anyway, anyone who posts an entry & really hopes to have it produced as a set, is delusional. If it passes, it's amazing, but it's most likely not gonna happen.

To me, Lego Ideas works like this: people show their MOCs which they would agree Lego to produce (not every MOCer would, so this is where the difference with, say MOCPages, is). It's not about showing your MOCs which you *want* Lego to produce (again, because the chances of happening are very very thin), but which you would *agree* Lego to produce.

I got 2k votes for my entry, I certainly don't consider it a failure.

I completely disagree with this. Ideas should be exclusively for people to post and vote for projects to become official sets. All projects should be of a quality that LEGO would conceivably produce.

Really? Show me which ones.

Here, I read:

"We welcome projects based on current licenses like Star Wars, Superheroes, Disney, etc., However, these active licenses are likely to have similar concepts already in the pipeline."

So it says it in clear, projects based on existing licenses are welcome.

OK, I was thinking about the other rule about projects based on licenses already used by Ideas, and you're right that Star Wars does not fit the description. But it has twice as many pieces as are allowed per the guidelines, which makes it unacceptable. It's a great MOC, but that's not what Ideas is about. And you're completely right that voting for this can send LEGO a message about how many fans want something similar, but such messages can be sent by posting and voting for similar projects that adhere to the site guidelines.