So I've been using Shapeways for three years now and I guess my shop is small/slow enough that I've not really had to do with more than a couple rejections but the recent threads have gotten me thinking. Now I mostly work with S&F and FUD so I can't really comment on other materials and my knowledge of how things work currently could be flawed but it's my understanding that currently everytime something is ordered it gets a manual check and thus, can be rejected even if it's been printed 100 times. Isn't that a bit wasteful? I mean, I understand checking new designs and all that but seems like Shapeways would be better off "letting designs go" once they hit a reliability threshold and spending more time on new and troublesome designs, both to ensure that initial checks are thorough enough to try avoid "False Positive/Negatives" and provide a deeper analysis of troublesome models, including providing examples of previous issues/breakages.* This might be feasible for all materials but for S&F and FUD/FED this should work now that we can define a specific orientation, once the model is checked any issues that arise should be from printer issues and Shapeways' handling, neither of which is something a design has any control/influence over. Obviously designs need to be checked initially but once that passes it shouldn't need to be rechecked until/unless is can't be printed or handled properly. In fact we can simply repurpose the "First to Try" system to track this, as long as the print history is above a set amount for a given model it shouldn't need to be checked again and again needlessly. Seems like something like this is a win/win set-up, designers don't have to worry about a design getting rejected out of the blue after months of printing fine, Shapeways can spend more time checking designs and working together with designers in more depth when dealing with troublesome designs. * Shapeways really need to really keep better records of how and why prints fail instead of simply record that it failed.