Failure to fulfil their obligations and refusal to pay back the money - page 18
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Are you sure?
based on combat experience on this forum (as well as on mql4.com) people are divided into programmers and the elite, who can't program.
In today's tradition - it is always the programmer who is to blame, because only he did something. The elite (for this they are the elite) cannot be blamed in any way, because they do nothing - and therefore are not to blame at all. It is incumbent upon the elite not to take the trouble to fully describe the future TS, it is enough only to say: when it went up - then we buy, when it goes down - then we sell, when the flat we do not trade. And most importantly, the programmers' codes do not work even on history - they still lose, because it is perfectly visible in visualization mode on the third replay, that now, after a couple or three bars the price will turn, but the expert opened in the wrong direction for some reason....
Somehow, but seriously, I just admire people who have been at the top of job section for quite a long time, and the question is not even about professionalism, but patience and the ability to find common ground with complete strangers - I tried, but it was very difficult to keep patience with repeated clarification of TOR, and so it turned out that I had to graphically show that everything works as written in the TOR. In general, I envy their stamina!
You are unfair on this point. The developer "spent his own time", not at the request of the customer, but of his own free will, agreeing to work on a dumb TOR and get paid for it. Checking the customer's fantasies about "how spaceships sail the UNIVERSE" was the developer's own decision, i.e. a decision on his own time.
Didn't get it.
You were originally leaning towards the customer, I saw that. I wasn't even surprised. But then you veered away from the original direction. So I read carefully.
I should have stuck to the last one - would that have been the right thing to do?
By the way, now, under the pressure of unscheduled perls from the topicstarter, I'm leaning towards the coder's side again.
I'm sure that what the second coder did to the customer contains not just "inaccuracies", but significant flaws that would need some serious work.
The question was "Are you sure that the contractor HAS decided to test the customer's fantasy for nothing?", not "Are you sure I'm wrong?".
Your question was actually originally short and stern:"Are you sure?" Now you are expanding it to a whole sentence. In fact, you're asking a new question. You'll have to figure out how to ask questions on this site.
Second. Given that you had to read my post twice, I note your extreme inattention to reading. In fact, you twice ignored a whole sentence: "The developer "spent his personal time" not as forced by the client, but on his own free will, agreeing to work on dumb TOR and get money for it." So I draw your attention to the phraseological turn:"agreeing to work on dumb TOR and get money for it".
Since agreeing to work on dumb TK implies checking the customer's imagination, I answer: yes, I am sure that by agreeing to work on dumb TK and get paid for it, the developer agreed to check the customer's imagination. But not "for nothing", but for money.
I don't get it.
I should have stuck to the last one - would that have been the right thing to do?
By the way, now, under the pressure of unscheduled perls from the topicstarter, I'm leaning towards the coder's side again.
I'm sure that what the second coder did to the customer contained not just "inaccuracies", but significant flaws that would have required some serious work.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/job/3315
Hmmm, didn't even expect to see such a simple TK once again today, it's like Christmas night - whatever you wish for it will come true
Once again, I apologize for the off-topic and the chorus.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/job/3315
Hmmm, didn't even expect to see such a simple TK once again today, it's like Christmas night - whatever you wish for it will come true
Once again, I apologise for the off-topic and the chorus.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/job/3315
Hmmm, didn't even expect to see such a simple TK once again today, it's like Christmas night - whatever you wish for it will come true
Once again, I apologise for the off-topic and the chorus.
Your question was actually originally short and stern:"Are you sure?" Now you are expanding it to a whole sentence. In fact, you're asking a new question. You'll have to figure out how to ask questions on this site.
Second. Given that you had to read my post twice, I note your extreme inattention to reading. In fact, you twice ignored a whole sentence: "The developer "spent his personal time" not as forced by the client, but on his own free will, agreeing to work on dumb TOR and get money for it." So I draw your attention to the phraseological turn:"agreeing to work on dumb TOR and get money for it".
Since agreeing to work on dumb TK implies checking the customer's imagination, I answer: yes, I am sure that by agreeing to work on dumb TK and get paid for it, the developer agreed to check the customer's imagination. But not "for nothing", but for money.
1. "You are unfair in this matter." - first sentence;
2. "The developer 'wasted his personal time' not under the customer's compulsion, but of his own free will, agreeing to work on a dumb TOR and get paid for it. Checking the customer's fantasies about "how spaceships sail the vastness of the UNIVERSE" was the developer's own decision, i.e. a decision at the expense of his own time."
"Are you sure?" I wonder if para. 2 was 20 pages long, would you also be rubbing it in here about "phraseological turns" and inattention, because you thought that the question was to the first sentence?
No need for answers.
Essentially - you agreed that it should pay to test the customer's imagination. WHTD. The rest is idle chatter.