Author Options:

Complaints Answered

Here is a topic where people can post complaints about instructables. Pleasedo not be negative but instead make the complaints constructive and cite what you would like to see changed.


It takes about 30 seconds to load each page on your site. This is the only website where this delay happens. Do you know of any reason this happens or what I can do about it?


This is disgusting and should be removed from the site. Not only is this teaching others how to build a weapon, but it is extremely dangerous

Have you read it ? Why do you think its "extremely dangerous" ?

If you read the other comment you would know that I've read it Steveastrouk.

"Ever find yourself needing to tar and feather someone, but lacking an angry mob to back you up? Maybe you wish to exact quick and messy physical revenge in a hurry?"

Tar and feathering is abhorrent - why bring it up? Reminds me of Godwin's law!

"home-made pressure chamber"
Need I comment?!!!

As some of the comments point out:
"builderkidj says:
What else you can put in:
-real grenades?

Aug 7, 2011. 9:46 AMflamesami says:
hmmm...thought train arriving at station 1:
-this gun can fire flour;
-flour is flammable and in powder form, therefore having a large surface area;
-when flour has maximum surface contact with air, it becomes extremely volatile;
anybody else on the same thought train as me?"

That's why I think it's extremely dangerous.

Telling people how to build something that is designed to fire missiles at others (and no it's not just water) is not a good idea. what next - how to build a bomb, so you can fill it with something else flammable?

You want to ban it because other people can think of ways to be silly?

So, if somebody comments that a pie could be thrown, we delete all pie recipes?

If somebody comments that knives can kill, we delete all projects using a knife?

By your logic, we should ban all references water pistols, because they can fire things that are not water.

In fact, my own paper catapult should be banned, because you could use it to fire a small watch battery, and paper is flammable, and we all know that watch batteries explode if you throw them in the fire, so really it's not a paper catapult, it's an explosive device, so it should be banned immediately, and you should report me to the DHS...

Yes because an over reaction makes your side looks credible!

The tut mentions flammable missiles - not intentionally - granted...but that doesn't make it any less dangerous.

I've had enough of responding to your silly silly points.

I stand by what I've said. It should be taken down.

No, an over-reaction makes you look hysterical.

Go and calm down.

I've already reported you to the DHS... Must've been, what, two years ago?

Try reading the comments less selectively, and you will notice positive, supportive comments from four people who work at Instructables HQ.

And, while you're busy flaming this project, take a moment to consider how you would feel if somebody made equally negative comments about one of the projects you have posted... Oh. They can't, can they?

You're taking a dig at me for not posting any tuts on here! Wow - that's pathetic. :)
If they find any of my tuts offensive I'd be very surprised.

Just because I've never bothered to put anything on here doesn't mean that
A. I don't have any on any site. And
B. That I have any less right to be a part of this community and to not like one of the tuts based on the insensitive language used in the description and the violent/dangerous nature of the tut.

Just because people who work at Instructables HQ have put positive comments doesn't mean I'm going to fall into line. I don't think it's appropriate and should be taken down! I'm allowed to think and say my own thoughts. Unless you're telling me that Instructables is part of some Borg like collective!!!!!?????

How dare you infer that I didn't read the other comments. Yes I saw the slap on the back comments too - but I was asked what I thought was wrong with it - to justify why I think it should be removed/what I'd said above. why would I put the positive comments down in an argument against it!!!!??? That defies logic!

I'm not saying you have no right to be here, but I am saying you have no proven track record to show you know what you are talking about. You certainly have no such record in this thread.

You are criticising a project for being unsafe on completely spurious grounds, that some of the comments included ideas that could be dangerous if they were ever followed through. The project you are objecting to is safe, if the instructions are followed. In the video, the author was using an industry-grade face shield to protect himself from splashed of foam - that is safety over-kill.

To ban a project because somebody else could misuse it in a dangerous manner is ridiculous, the nanny state in extremis.

I repeat, by your logic, we should ban water pistols, because some people have had the idea of using them to squirt other liquids, ban projects with sharp tools because some people have had the idea of sticking sharp things into other people. Ban projects involving power tools, because people might decide to recreate the Texas Chain Saw Massacre etc etc continue ad ridiculum.

As for the fire-risk of flour - I am a science teacher, and have been responsible for implementing HSE regulations in industry. To create an explosion with air-borne flour requires confinement prior to ignition. Igniting a cloud of flour of the kind generated by this gun is very hard. Even with a bunsen burner as an ignition source, the best you can hope for is a momentary, non-expansive flare.


I'm curious - why are you obsessing over the hazards of a modified water-pistol with an range of roughly three metres, when there are projects here that could kill?

There are actual guns on this site. Knives. Full-size siege weapons. Automobiles. Motorbikes. Toxins. Bodily mutilation.

Tell you what, why don't you spend a few weeks going through the tens of thousands of projects on this site, and compile a list of all those projects that do not meet your personal standards of "safe", and email it to HQ (address is at the bottom of the page) with a demand to have them removed.

See where you get.

And, while you're busy flaming this project, take a moment to consider how you would feel if somebody made equally negative comments about one of the projects you have posted... Oh. They can't, can they?

Oh, tough! :)

Godwins law ? How is that relevant to the discussion in hand ?


(To be read in your deepest, slowest, most ominous voice).

It was a dark and stormy night,
and I was approached by a local gang of marshmallow gunners. The end result was not pretty, as I was a member of the s'mores gang... I still have the scars.

You haven't read past the title of that project, have you?

Yes I have. thanks for the condescension.

You're welcome.

The reason I asked is because you massively over-reacted to a well-executed project which, if followed properly, is as safe as any other, commercially-available, pressurised water pistol.

You've clearly missed the point. I'm not talking about the quality of the tut!

I know exactly what you're on about - you are simply not reading what I (and the project's author) have actually written.

I've just read it, I thought it was good. Doesn't seem particularly dangerous unless, maybe, you put something stupid in it, and if you do that, you're probably going to do something stupid anyway.


6 years ago

You need to screen your advertisers more carefully. I receive the instructables email newsletter. The most recent one "Tar and Feather Gun, Steampunk Mechanized Plasma Bulb, Handmade Mini SLR Camera" has an ad halfway down that isn't marked as an ad.

More over when you go they make claims about building a solar panel for a ridiculously cheap price. Too good to be true.

So when you do a search you find out they are a scam.

I think it is a problem to let them advertise like this. It seems like they are just another legitimate instructable. I think you have a duty to your audience not to represent scammers like officially endorsed instructables.

Please send out a secondary email naming the scam to everyone who received the first email.

First thing, you don't need one topic to post all criticisms - the whole "feedback" forum is for that.

Secondly, I agree - adverts should be marked as an advert, no matter what the legitimacy of the advertiser. That advert looked to much like a legitimate item in the newsletter.

(I've changed the keywords to reflect the nature of the above feedback)