LEGO Ideas Goes Live

[Hapori Tohu]

As we reported on a week ago, LEGO CUUSOO has now officially become LEGO Ideas and the site has gone live today. With new branding, new design and new guidelines (most notably opening project submission up to anyone of at least 13 years of age), the succesful platform is ready to embark on a new era of fan-created LEGO sets. Head over to the brand new website and get started today!

 

View the full article

[Takanuinuva]

I want to merge my old Cuusoo account but the activation email isn't being sent to my email account. Anyone else having that problem?

[Sybre]

I'm getting an account soon! I can't wait to get started!

 

I read on the website that you can get 5 complementary copies of your final set! That's a good enough deal for me!

[Lyichir]

Unfortunately, my Cuusoo account was attached to my old college email that doesn't exist anymore. I've emailed support to see if I can tie the account to my Lego account anyway or at least delete the old account since it's impossible to access.

[fishers64]

I'm getting an account soon! I can't wait to get started!

 

I read on the website that you can get 5 complementary copies of your final set! That's a good enough deal for me!

ONLY 5 copies?

 

I haven't used my Cuusoo account much, mostly just to vote on stuff, but if I come up with something...

Edited May 1, 2014 by fishers64

[Taria Pakari]

I want to merge my old Cuusoo account but the activation email isn't being sent to my email account. Anyone else having that problem?

 

I'm only just starting up an account but it doesn't seem to be sending me the activation email either.

[fishers64]

You have to wait a few minutes. Patience - I got mine. Try checking your email now. (?)

Edited May 1, 2014 by fishers64

[Taria Pakari]

You have to wait a few minutes. Patience - I got mine. Try checking your email now. (?)

 

Minutes must work differently in different time-zones because I've still not got the activation email over 8 hours later. :v

 

Edit: And not two minutes after making this post I get the email. Must have heard me complaining about it over the ocean.

Edited May 1, 2014 by Terton

[Mr. Cup of Fail]

This is good and I really hope I can get my story done and also make set Projects of all of them.

But I don't think I am going to be done with my Taran Project anytime soon.

 

 

I want to merge my old Cuusoo account but the activation email isn't being sent to my email account. Anyone else having that problem?

Not happening to me mate

Edited May 6, 2014 by ShadowWolfHount

[Takanuinuva]

I should mention I was able to merge my old account with my Lego Id a few days ago. So I got my Lego Ideas account up and running.

[Mr. Cup of Fail]

Alright, well that is good

[Steve the Squid]

There's a lot of good improvements, but I don't like some of the changes. They definitely fixed a few stupid things from Cuusoo, like adding a 1 year limit, adding more info for when you support something (though people will still BS it and it won't mean anything), and making it easier to find good projects, but I don't like how it is promoting following people and getting followed. From what I've seen, people are now just going around and following anyone they can find, with the hopes that other people will reciprocate, and they will get POINTS. With this POINTS system, it will probably encourage people to vote for things they don't really support, cheating on votes, etc.

 

Sure it will almost definitely succeed in keeping the site more active, but I don't want to see more projects like Purdue Pete where it's obvious that the person either used dirty tricks, or the female minfigs, where they almost definitely got a non-lego community to go and vote for a project that they don't actually intend to buy.

 

The concept of Lego Ideas is wonderful, but something big needs to be done to keep out the bad stuff, make cheating more difficult, and make it so that good mocs with realistic goals can get the support they deserve. (R.I.P. Mahjqa's Tachikoma project!)

Edited May 10, 2014 by Steve the Squid

[Aanchir]

Sure it will almost definitely succeed in keeping the site more active, but I don't want to see more projects like Purdue Pete where it's obvious that the person either used dirty tricks, or the female minfigs, where they almost definitely got a non-lego community to go and vote for a project that they don't actually intend to buy.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeking votes from people outside of established LEGO communities. And there's no reason people from outside of LEGO communities would be less honest than actual LEGO fans about their intent to purchase. It bothers me how so many people think that support from people who don't participate on LEGO-related discussion forums or go to LEGO conventions are less legitimate than support from people who do.

 

Keep in mind also that not all LEGO buyers are buying for themselves. Many are parents or gift-givers who buy LEGO as gifts for the children in their lives. So even people who don't own a single LEGO set of their own, or who haven't built a LEGO set since they were children, can be legitimate supporters.

 

I remember that when the LEGO Minecraft proposal reached 10,000 supporters in record-breaking time, a lot of AFOLs dismissed its validity because a lot of the gathering of support was done within the Minecraft community, not within LEGO fan communities. Yet as it turns out, the Minecraft set was so wildly popular that it has become a launching point for an entire LEGO Minecraft theme.

[Steve the Squid]

 

Sure it will almost definitely succeed in keeping the site more active, but I don't want to see more projects like Purdue Pete where it's obvious that the person either used dirty tricks, or the female minfigs, where they almost definitely got a non-lego community to go and vote for a project that they don't actually intend to buy.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeking votes from people outside of established LEGO communities. And there's no reason people from outside of LEGO communities would be less honest than actual LEGO fans about their intent to purchase. It bothers me how so many people think that support from people who don't participate on LEGO-related discussion forums or go to LEGO conventions are less legitimate than support from people who do.

 

Keep in mind also that not all LEGO buyers are buying for themselves. Many are parents or gift-givers who buy LEGO as gifts for the children in their lives. So even people who don't own a single LEGO set of their own, or who haven't built a LEGO set since they were children, can be legitimate supporters.

 

I remember that when the LEGO Minecraft proposal reached 10,000 supporters in record-breaking time, a lot of AFOLs dismissed its validity because a lot of the gathering of support was done within the Minecraft community, not within LEGO fan communities. Yet as it turns out, the Minecraft set was so wildly popular that it has become a launching point for an entire LEGO Minecraft theme.

 

Do you really think that 10,000 purdue students would buy that Purdue Pete set?

[Lyichir]

 

 

Sure it will almost definitely succeed in keeping the site more active, but I don't want to see more projects like Purdue Pete where it's obvious that the person either used dirty tricks, or the female minfigs, where they almost definitely got a non-lego community to go and vote for a project that they don't actually intend to buy.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeking votes from people outside of established LEGO communities. And there's no reason people from outside of LEGO communities would be less honest than actual LEGO fans about their intent to purchase. It bothers me how so many people think that support from people who don't participate on LEGO-related discussion forums or go to LEGO conventions are less legitimate than support from people who do.

 

Keep in mind also that not all LEGO buyers are buying for themselves. Many are parents or gift-givers who buy LEGO as gifts for the children in their lives. So even people who don't own a single LEGO set of their own, or who haven't built a LEGO set since they were children, can be legitimate supporters.

 

I remember that when the LEGO Minecraft proposal reached 10,000 supporters in record-breaking time, a lot of AFOLs dismissed its validity because a lot of the gathering of support was done within the Minecraft community, not within LEGO fan communities. Yet as it turns out, the Minecraft set was so wildly popular that it has become a launching point for an entire LEGO Minecraft theme.

 

Do you really think that 10,000 purdue students would buy that Purdue Pete set?

 

Maybe not. But that doesn't mean that every instance of a project creator going to non-traditional venues seeking support will be like that, and in fact, seeking out casual or relapsed Lego fans in non-Lego-related venues is one of the best ways to earn support for a project.

 

In the case of Purdue Pete, many (but not all) supporters created accounts just to support the project. The new points system (combined with the Lego ID integration) could conceivably be used to avoid issues like that, by allowing the review staff to gauge how many of a projects supporters have abandoned the site after supporting a single project, or conversely, how many support projects indiscriminately just to boost their own reputation. A project that has the bulk of its support coming from either of these groups would likely be judged as a weaker business case than a project that drew established users or new users who show dedication to the site and the Lego brand.

[Sumiki]

I get the same vibe from the Points system that I did when we implemented the reputation system here on BZP. I have to admit that I'm a tad skeptical, but overall I think it's not going to be as bad as it might be. After all, harnessing enough people to sign up for a service just to vote towards something so it might happen is a long shot, unless you're a celebrity with a considerable fan base, in which case, it's probably something that would still sell, even if the support is artificially inflated.

[Steve the Squid]

 

 

 

Sure it will almost definitely succeed in keeping the site more active, but I don't want to see more projects like Purdue Pete where it's obvious that the person either used dirty tricks, or the female minfigs, where they almost definitely got a non-lego community to go and vote for a project that they don't actually intend to buy.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeking votes from people outside of established LEGO communities. And there's no reason people from outside of LEGO communities would be less honest than actual LEGO fans about their intent to purchase. It bothers me how so many people think that support from people who don't participate on LEGO-related discussion forums or go to LEGO conventions are less legitimate than support from people who do.

 

Keep in mind also that not all LEGO buyers are buying for themselves. Many are parents or gift-givers who buy LEGO as gifts for the children in their lives. So even people who don't own a single LEGO set of their own, or who haven't built a LEGO set since they were children, can be legitimate supporters.

 

I remember that when the LEGO Minecraft proposal reached 10,000 supporters in record-breaking time, a lot of AFOLs dismissed its validity because a lot of the gathering of support was done within the Minecraft community, not within LEGO fan communities. Yet as it turns out, the Minecraft set was so wildly popular that it has become a launching point for an entire LEGO Minecraft theme.

 

Do you really think that 10,000 purdue students would buy that Purdue Pete set?

 

In the case of Purdue Pete, many (but not all) supporters created accounts just to support the project. The new points system (combined with the Lego ID integration) could conceivably be used to avoid issues like that, by allowing the review staff to gauge how many of a projects supporters have abandoned the site after supporting a single project, or conversely, how many support projects indiscriminately just to boost their own reputation. A project that has the bulk of its support coming from either of these groups would likely be judged as a weaker business case than a project that drew established users or new users who show dedication to the site and the Lego brand.

 

That may be true, but you forget that the point system has nothing to do with Lego being able to do that. They could analyze how many accounts were created or how many people are indiscriminate spammers regardless of whether there is a public point system or not; and in the case of the people who vote for everything, there wouldn't be that problem in the first place (or at least not nearly as much) if the point system weren't there.