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 5
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
Somebody, who understands, can you explain? What good is arbitrage, what good is it if the customer can write a negative review for nothing? Well, maybe you didn't kiss him and he's not satisfied. What good is a job if the customer, with or without a job, can write a negative review (for free) when he gets paid by WM? Where to go with this kind of feedback?
In Zhoba, feedback is of no use at all, neither positive nor negative. I had a couple of hysterics when, at the beginning, both the customer and the programmer could not get enough of the feedback. Then they calmed down. We ran out of reviews and switched to the forum to "fight".
What can a review say with such content: "! What kind of feedback can a customer give if it's the first time he/she launched the Expert Advisor at all?
The reviews should:
- Either be written by a third party,
- written after some time,
- one customer/developer may not leave a review for a job, but for the collaboration in general (then the customer will not leave multiple reviews, and will not get a rating)
- the feedback should be informative
- reviews should be required
- reviews should be able to be edited to indicate when they were changed and why
- it should be possible to leave a response to the review
Completely agree with your assessment of the moderators.
About feedback, ratings, etc. Why reinvent the wheel? Maximum openness of this topic will solve all problems. Now negative reviews (some) are deleted. What for? Let everyone draw their own conclusions, create their own opinions about the performers.
Speak specifically, please. Your words sound like a systematic policy, yet you have never been involved in service Jobs. On what basis then do you make such statements?
One or two negative feedbacks from insane customers have been removed and now there is no way for them to get into Jobs. And there is no need to draw generalised conclusions from this. We need to protect ourselves from inadequate people who can ruin the blood of honest developers.
An example, (nothing personal) I compare the profiles of Integer and _Techno_. The first one has: good, high-quality articles, codes posted in kodobaza (for free) and commissioned work. The second: only completed works to order in the style of an assembly line. My choice is unequivocal: Integer.
Developers in Zhaba should have a certification. I am not talking about testing. This issue has been raised many times and a solution has not been found and will never be found. But there is an opportunity for indirect attestation on the resource. To do this there is - publication of articles and materials in the code base (author's materials). A developer in the "top" must not have a bare track record - only works. Either "bare" must play a significant role.
Let's look at Integer's rating - 8200 - 7 articles published, 61 codes in the codebase, 16 works in Zhoba? What is the value of an article, an author code in the codebase and a work in Zhoba?
Question. How is it possible that Integer is not even in the top 10 (according to the current state of affairs)?
Another example, Dima_S has 7 published articles, 1 codobase, 42 openings in Zhobe.
Same question. Why is Dima_S not in the top 10?
Minimal level of his works in 10-top now is 71.
Integer and Dima_S example is nothing personal, just an example.
Can not "top" classified by the number of completed works. It is fundamentally wrong. Qualification articles, codes in Codabase - available and open. Job qualification in Zhoba is closed and not available. Consequently, the "top" is critically biased.
Make a correspondence, for example, 1 article = 100 works in Zhoba, 1 work in the codabase = 1 work in Zhoba.
Total in the top - 1st Integer, 2nd Dima_S
Forgot about GODZILLA - 7 articles, 340 codabase, 1 job in Zhoba
For a more comprehensive assessment of performers, you can look at their achievements section in their profile - there is a lot of graded information there.
But the general problem is clear - few people want to spend time reading and searching for information.
How do you do that? Each achievement has a detailed explanation specifically for quick use.
"Quick use" hasn't worked out yet. Previously in the profile - click on the number of articles - and you get a list of articles by that particular author. Also with Codabase.
Now this possibility is absent. You want to see articles of the author - find ways to do it yourself.
And who to look to in Achievement when choosing a developer
to someone who has left an offer and wants to do the work.
to someone who has left an offer and wants to do the job.
I am talking about the list of "top" and its "adequacy"="qualification".
Also Alexey - 6 articles, 6 codebases, 9 Job - at least - you - in the top 5.
Mechanism of leaving requests both from developer and executor - the mechanism of choice - it is influenced by the top.
Of course, everyone can remove themselves from the "top". But the distribution of places in the top - must be objective and correspond to reality. Now the top is "bloated".