Failure to fulfil their obligations and refusal to pay back the money - page 16

 
Yedelkin:

An excellent and sensible answer. But the answer is from the developer's point of view. So the question is: if you, as the developer, are not happy with the client's"abnormal and unreadable" assignment, what should you do: reject the"abnormal and unreadable", or take the"abnormal and unreadable" job?

In most cases, you can take it on and get it right, except in a few isolated cases. It is because of these isolated cases, now if it is clear from the assignment that the client has not paid enough attention to the preparation of the assignment, then unequivocally not.

 
Mathemat:

You can easily find this article on komposter' s profile on the "four" (I can't go to the "four" forum right now to give you the link).

His article on the subject is also available here, a more advanced version.
 
Yedelkin: But all the same, there has to be a solution.

For now, the most sensible solution is simply to work through the service. There is no way to force it. Let things be as they are.

The current situation, as I understand it, has been resolved. The parties have agreed to finish the work through the service.

 
Integer:

In most cases, you can take on a job and get it done, except in isolated cases. Because of these isolated cases, now if it is clear from the assignment that the client has not paid enough attention to the preparation of the assignment, then definitely not.

Agree that with this approach, ALL the risks of working with"abnormal and unreadable" terms of reference are assumed by the developer. And the client has the right to demand that the work be done as described in his"abnormal and unreadable" TOR.
 
Mathemat:

Let it be as it is.

At least a warning about the extreme undesirability of working 'not through the service'...

Even to the extent of saying that "working through a non-service means losing your money, regardless of the status of your chosen contractor". That's more understandable than any article.

 
Mathemat:(I don't have the ability to go to the quadruple forum right now to give a link).

Sorry for the offtops, but I couldn't take it.

wow! how many years on the internet, moderated on several resources myself - when I was not lazy, but to be a moderator and not be able to enter a forum, and for such a reason....

wow! no words! :)

 
Yedelkin:
Agree that with this approach, ALL the risks of working with"abnormal and unreadable" terms of reference are assumed by the developer. And the customer has the right to demand that the work is done as described in the TOR.

Not really, i.e. only some isolated cases are considered that way, in other cases the customer is sympathetic, at least with a kind word, if not with money.

 
IgorM:

Sorry for the offtops, but I couldn't take it.

wow! how many years on the internet, moderated on several resources myself - when I was not too lazy, but to be a moderator and not be able to enter a forum, and for such a reason....

wow! no words! :)

Maybe he's using his mobile phone.
 
Integer:

Not really, i.e. only some isolated cases are considered that way, in other cases the customer is sympathetic, at least with a kind word, if not with money.

:) So, despite the absurdity of"abnormal and unreadable" TOR, they don't agree to shift the risk onto the developers :) I see.