For four years, Polymaker was our primary 3D printing material and community sponsor. I've said it publicly and I'll say it again: they make some of the best engineering filaments on the market. This was never a product issue.
This was an integrity issue.
When you build a platform centered on autonomy, technology sovereignty and operational freedom, you cannot allow yourself to be owned financially or culturally by the very companies you trust with sponsorships. Because we were Polymaker's most successful partner, we were the benchmark. But for three years, I gave them every benefit of the doubt behind closed doors while navigating targeted harassment, financial neglect, and corporate indifference.
Here is the exact truth of why we walked away from their check on the table.
1. Incompetence Masked as Corporate Policy
Independent creators are expected to run operating budgets on tight margins, yet this major material brand routinely treats basic professional obligations as an afterthought. Over three years, late payments weren't an occasional accounting error; they were a documented, systemic pattern. From executive marketing leads admitting in writing that invoices sat forgotten for months due to administrative neglect, to internal escalations requiring co-founder intervention just to clear basic accounts, the operation was plagued by chronic delays. Invoices were forgotten for weeks at a time by their "community manager", culminating in unpaid balances being publicly denied by corporate channels while still sitting open on the books (even paying after they denied it).
When a major company repeatedly forces its top platform partner to float their balance sheet, it isn't an administrative slip — it is incompetence, insolvency, or leverage. We don't accept that from any of our other business partners, and we don't accept it from sponsors.
2. Protecting Bad Actors to Safeguard Market Share
Because our platform was Polymaker's top-performing partnership, we became an obvious target for internal professional envy. For years, other official Polymaker partners on the exact same brand payroll systematically targeted me, my channels, and my family. They went so far as fully doxxing me and my family, spreading hateful lies and misinformation, repeatedly contacting sponsors to get us canceled, and digging for leverage to pull us down — all of this both publicly and privately.
Polymaker knew. I brought it to them repeatedly, and they acknowledged it, then told us to ignore it and soldier on. They even referred to other Polymaker partners as meaningless, calling them close-minded and children to be ignored. Polymaker called me many times over the years to tell me they'd had "another" call with their problem partners, where they had to apologize for the harassment, abuse and lies about me and our production. Still, to protect their brand, Polymaker did nothing.
Their own internal staff privately confirmed the harassment, admitted these roster partners were caught lying, and explicitly questioned why Polymaker continued working with them. Yet leadership kept the door wide open. When those partners were cut off from our platforms, they went directly to Polymaker's marketing director to try and secure back-door access to our ecosystem.
Polymaker knew their own brand partners were actively trying to sabotage their #1 show, but chose to appease them anyway to protect their broader reach. When a sponsor privately agrees that their top creator is being targeted by other sponsored talent, but publicly enables the perpetrators to protect their bottom line, that isn't neutrality. That's cowardice. They were quite literally spending your money to pay their partners to attack me and my family.
3. The Ultimatum and the Content Shift
By late 2025, I reached my limit. I would transfer the toxic risk to Polymaker, or we would move on without them. I handed Polymaker a strict ultimatum in the form of a contract proposal: if they wanted to retain us as their primary show despite the ongoing abuse from their partner roster, it was going to cost them a massive top-tier buyout. The price tag reflected the exact cost of enduring their toxic environment. When they failed to act, I made the decision before the end of 2025 that we were moving on.
As we pivoted into 2026, growing our audience by over 1000% in just a few short months -- making our content louder, more aggressive, and focused on 3D printing legislation, ownership and technology, Polymaker's community manager reached out. In so many words, they let us know they didn't appreciate the sharp, confrontational direction our channel was taking.
At a time when my channel was pulling in millions of unique viewers a month, outpacing every other content creator in this niche, what you expect from a competent community manager is full alignment and support: "How can we help? What resources can we back you with to maintain our partnership?" Instead, their management mishandled creator relationships across the board, giving me indifference and even combative, antagonistic responses rather than the collaborative partnership we built over five years. That breakdown in basic leadership played a massive role in sealing the decision.
4. The 2A Reality Check, the Public Meltdown, and the Receipts
The final breaking point came when I exposed a core truth about their business model: Polymaker is not a defender of the Second Amendment.
They are a foreign company operating out of China. They don't actively fight for the Bill of Rights or 2A liberties. They simply haven't banned or stopped people from using their filament for 2A builds because it's currently legal to do so. That isn't advocacy; it's basic retail. The narrative that Polymaker actively "supports" the 2A community is an illusion. When legislation tightens, a foreign material manufacturer will not stand in court to defend your American Constitutional Rights and your hardware sovereignty. I don't think this should come as a surprise to anyone, and it's delusional to believe otherwise.
When I pointed this reality out publicly, it threatened their bottom line in a market segment they heavily rely on.
That was when their domestic employees attacked and their overseas social media team panicked. Their Chinese accounts jumped in online, grew aggressive, and began making blatantly false public claims. My original post pointed out that they still had an unpaid invoice pending, and Polymaker officially called me a liar on public social media.
I immediately dismantled those lies with receipts. The back-and-forth became so visually embarrassing for the brand that within hours, corporate handed down a complete social media gag order, instantly stopping all replies and halting their public engagement with me entirely, because they had severely overreached.
And while that specific invoice finally landed straight in my bank account a week after they insisted they owed me nothing and called me a liar, the books are still not closed. Technically, as of right now, Polymaker still owes us revenue for affiliate sales and our creator spool filament royalties.
Polymaker did make one last attempt to retain our partnership by offering me a monthly creator payment, and clarified, when I asked, that there would be no obligation to create content for the financial support. I declined. I know what a retainer to buy silence looks like.
To top it off, after I made the conscious choice not to renew our contract, Polymaker continued to run paid advertisements using my likeness for several months, completely outside of contract. That unauthorized exploitation of my identity and media footprint is currently being reviewed directly by legal counsel.
What Sovereignty Costs
I posted the receipts. None of it was disputed, because none of it could be.
Walking away from our primary sponsor was seamless because we planned for it. Throughout the previous years, we strategically built our independence, expanded our reach, and decoupled our operation from corporate reliance so that cutting ties required zero hesitation. You cannot preach self-reliance and resistance to corporate control while taking checks from a material company that operates on delay tactics, protects bad actors on its own roster, hides behind fake 2A support, resorts to public slander on unpaid bills, and uses creator likenesses without a contract.
When state after state began introducing sweeping legislation to outlaw micro-manufacturing and restrict 3D printers, I was the one who sounded the alarm. I stood up first. I spoke out loudly to warn this community about the corporate and legislative war on physical production.
When you step into that arena to fight for hardware sovereignty, there is no room for compromise. There was no middle ground: either our sponsors were going to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with us in full support of that mission, or I was going to walk away from them.
The freedom to create, the freedom to build, and the right to own your tools of production are infinitely more important than any corporate retainer or material sponsor. If sounding the alarm means severing ties with the biggest names in the industry to keep this platform completely uncompromised, that is a choice I will make every single time.
We don't sell our reputation for anything. Having this studio and building this infrastructure gives us the power to walk away from anyone who tries to dictate our voice. We will always remain 100% independent, beholden to no one, and accountable only to the truth.
0 comments