Discussing conflicts between programmers and customers. A discussion of ambiguous situations between the programmer and the client, and a rating of the most conflicted programmer performers. - page 3
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
Tattling is bad. Arbitration is doing just fine. Screw the topic.
Eugene (if Skype is not cheating), there is always a client-customer problem. And not only in programming.
I think you have seen that the same topics are often raised on this forum, asking to find out who is right and who is wrong.
But let's be honest. What do the parties really need? The answer seems obvious to me:
For the customer:
1. A not stupid and patient performer who will understand the thoughts of the customer, not a techie like himself.
2. The completed task is exactly with these thoughts, even if not as clearly stated in the terms of reference.
3. And it is desirable the further availability of the performer in case of new edits and thoughts of code modification.
What the implementer needs:
1. A person who is not stupid and patient and who will try to understand his task.
2. A clear task set out in the text and explained in detail using Occam's razor.
The customer will not be stingy in case of rework.
With hand on heart, tell me in what point there was a failure in your order?
At what stage of communication you began to feel that the order does not stick and can not finish successfully?
2. The completed job is exactly along these lines, even if not as clearly stated in the terms of reference.
Yes, the idea of the option of breaking off with a full refund to the client is a good one.
We will implement it.
Any regulation that is passed, be it a law or just a rule on the forum, should be examined for abuse. I am not a programmer and do not know their work on this resource, I can assume, purely theoretically, this is the situation. I'm a programmer, have a great track record, naturally, as in my case, the client chooses a coryphaeus. Offers a job for $30. The contractor gets to work. But when a job for $50 comes along, the programmer decides that I'll take this one, too, and of course, the production time increases. Bam, $150 goes off! So, here it is, the magic button "Termination with Refund", our hero, prolific with all sorts of handicrafts, decides - 30 roubles, what the heck. And lo and behold, he is the happy owner of 150 quid.
Of course, many will be outraged, not a horse and cart and already charges, but we understand that we are all human, we all have instincts, and no one has canceled greed.
I did not want to personally offend anyone by that example, I am not criticizing anyone in particular, I just wanted to show that a thoughtless acceptance of that possibility could lead to a bias that, who knows yet, would hurt more.
It is not a pleasure, but a collection of necessary information.
Any regulation that is passed, be it a law or simply a forum rule, should be examined for abuse. I am not a programmer and do not know their work on this resource, I can assume, purely theoretically, this is the situation. I'm a programmer, have a great track record, naturally, as in my case, the client chooses a coryphaeus. Offers a job for $30. The contractor gets to work. But when a job for $50 comes along, the programmer decides that I'll take this one, too, and of course, the production time increases. Bam, $150 goes off! You want it, right? So, here it is, the magic button "Termination with Refund", our hero, prolific with all sorts of handicrafts, decides - 30 roubles, what the heck. And lo and behold, he's the lucky owner of 150 quid.
Any regulation that is passed, be it a law or just a rule on the forum, should be examined for abuse. I am not a programmer and do not know their work on this resource, I can assume, purely theoretically, this is the situation. I'm a programmer, have a great track record, naturally, as in my case, the client chooses a coryphaeus. Offers a job for $30. The contractor gets to work. But when a job for $50 comes along, the programmer decides that I'll take this one, too, and of course, the production time increases. Bam, $150 goes off! You want it, right? So, here it is, the magic button "Termination with Refund", our hero, prolific with all sorts of handicrafts, decides - 30 roubles, what the heck. And lo and behold, he is the happy owner of 150 quid.
Of course, many will be outraged, not a horse and cart and already charges, but we understand that we are all human, we all have instincts, and no one has canceled greed.
By this example, I did not want to offend anyone personally, and I am not talking about anyone in particular, I just wanted to show that a rash acceptance of this opportunity can lead to distortion, which, it is not clear to whom it will hurt more.
We are already discussing a mechanism for seriously downgrading a developer.
If
Renat:
We don't plan to fine you for appealing to arbitrage.
then the penalty should be a downgrade.
but what rating are we talking about? The one under the icon - so in the Work service - this rating is clearly not visible - and does not play a role.
Please, if a "Coryphaeus" takes a job for 30 or 50 credits, it has to be for an hour and a half of work, otherwise he's not a "Coryphaeus" at all.
That's why we are already discussing a mechanism of serious downgrading of developer's rating.
Just don't forget that a programmer gains a rating over the years, while a customer has virtually no rating.
How do you lower a customer's rating? There is no way.
If anything, he (the customer) will register a new nickname tomorrow, and do not care about your rating.