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 29
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
Make a memo for the client, briefly describing how to [draw up the ToR and] select the contractor. And name it accordingly: "Important: How to [compose ToR and] choose a contractor". And this memo should be in the most prominent place in the "Jobs" service. Even if not in the form of a text, but with a link. Do not read carefully - his own fault. And check the box for reading as a mandatory point in the stages of approval of TOR.
And the articles - few people read them, it's not obligatory.
In the future, if an arbitration situation arises, the first thing to tell the customer: You have read the Memo, here is your checkmark. We proceed from the fact that the customer was chosen by you consciously, and not on the principle of "the most beautiful (topovye), he is mine.
The customer is right. He needs quality. That's why he's not happy with hackwork.
Define "hackwork". What is meant by 'hackwork'?
- Bad coding
- Or implementation of TOR?
If the implementation of TOR, then you need to figure out whose "hack" it was - the customer or the programmer.
If the customer sees one thing in black and white in the written terms of reference with the words "It's not in the TOR, but it was implied. This is considered "hackwork"? But such phrases are very common. And after these phrases and there are such topics.
A top is needed, but with a mandatory brief description of the nature of the work done. The following is about right: 1) 'customer', 2) 'nature of work'. It would be much more convenient for customers, because it will be visible what the performer is able to do.
One "topovik" 500 completed jobs, but none with gridiron. And the other has 20 jobs, but among them 5 griders. Who is more reasonable to choose for a customer with a grider?
The customer finds out later, when the order is fulfilled, that it is rubbish.
A top is needed, but with a mandatory brief description of the nature of the work done. The following is about right: 1) 'customer', 2) 'nature of work'. It would be much more convenient for customers, because it would be obvious what the contractor is able to do.
I don't understand what this post is about, but if the customer doesn't want to pay - let him either learn to code or wait for an enthusiastic coder, but without a guaranteed result and who knows when.
P.S. What can you do: all customers think their ideas are invaluable - until they are implemented in the code. Well, coders have to make some profit out of it.
Many coders at once say that their ideas are not very valuable, to put it mildly. But customers don't really listen to them.
For example, if a person buys a fishing rod for $1000 (I don't know the price, I just saw it on a TV show), does that mean it has to pay for itself? And does this person have to enjoy selling the fish, or the fishing itself? And is he even obliged to sell the fish, since the money was spent on buying the tackle?
You should open a list of the "most conflict-ridden programmers". After 30 pages of discussion, the name of the "hero" remains unknown. How are you going to make a list? The public must know the "heroes" by sight.
This is a blackmail branch. In the hope that the programmer will see it and move quickly.
Have you read the terms of reference? Read it.
I have a hunch this topic has a chance to go in the sand to no avail - 30 pages of posts without even a hint of mutual understanding.
For some reason there is a fierce confrontation between "progreshers vs customers" and vice versa. Somehow forgotten worldly principle of relativity - today you are the customer and I am the doer, tomorrow I will go to the service station and myself will be in the role of the customer. And God grant me wit and some knowledge, so as not to look the idiot "not understanding, what he wants" before the locksmith-assos, armed with the advanced diagnostic equipment and who spent years of his life to acquire knowledge and experience. So, they will make my car "flew" at good service, its engine "sang", etc., and I learn bitterly in my old age at lousy service that I have no idea of design, operating principles and purpose of some lambda sensor, therefore I was fated to drive on drobagan...
Here abolk I've noticed that the customers are 95% normal and 5% inadequate. I envy him as a doer, he is better off compared to the customers. This is because when searching for a contractor, each customer (at least for the first time) has the chance to meet a much higher percentage of inadequate ones. I will give you an example from my own experience: I was a customer once. It was few years ago, there was no "Jobs" service yet, and some thread on MQL4 forum tried to determine the rating of progessors, even if I remember correctly, this rating was posted on some web-site. So I started to look for it. Only the seventh attempt was successful. Two people have convinces me that the algorithm I required cannot be implemented in MQL4. One week after I received the payment, the other one has admitted that such a complicated order cannot be implemented, due to lack of time, and returned the deposit. The next stage was testing of a sample, but the sample didn't want to run on any of the 3 computers I had available with different versions of Windows, and the developer claimed it all worked fine.I asked us to part with (Deposit returned to me reluctantly and not in full, arguing that wasted time and effort, I vs this in connection with the WM profile of the artist left a review in arbitration did not write).The next performer only after a few days of "work" on the order "saw the light" that I needed an advisor, not a script, brought convincing arguments about the impossibility of implementing such an algorithm as an EA and at that we parted peacefully, thanks to the deposit was not given in this case. Then there was no less telling moment - another contractor nervously (I very mildly described his condition) told me that I was just messing with his head, not wanting to pay for work - he sent me a prototype and proved that everything works in accordance with the TOR, I claimed that this was not true. Only as a result of "voice" dialogue the situation became clear - the performer simply had not read the TOR to the end and had not seen the last page. I did not want to continue the cooperation, because during the process of understanding the situation I even got to the point of insulting the implementer.
But the seventh account programmer was like a reward for all my previous frustrations and my patience - everything was just FINE, "as for me", took into account all my wishes, during the discussion he gave me advice on optimizing the algorithm in terms of performance, response to unexpected situations like power outage or connection with the server, etc. And despite my difficult financial situation at the time, I gladly paid him (if memory serves me correctly, $100).
Thus, it turns out that based on my experience the ratio of adequate to inadequate progers 1 to 6! You can translate it into percentages yourself. Impressive?
And now I want to tell you from my distant past: in Soviet times I worked for 13 years in the service, or rather, as a telemanager in a TV studio. It happened so, that at that time the Party and the government began to bring to the consciousness of workers in all the services this alphabetical truth - "The Client is Always Right". How depressed I was at first at the thought of such a savage injustice! I didn't leave the sector only because I liked the work itself - every day something new and interesting. I had to put up with this "injustice". And soon after humility on my part, I felt the other side of the "rightness of the client" - his desire to prove his rightness materially. I was a pretty great TV repairman, but objectively I must say - not the best in town (there were two cooler than me), but because of my transformed in the right direction attitude to customers, I became the most sought-after and "desirable" TV technician. As a result - I was not in material difficulties (my salary was higher than that of most miners and metallurgists), I did not know about scarcity (although almost everything was in short supply) - clients did not forget my "beloved telemaster".
I would like to summarise - I am in favour of the "doer-customer" relationship always being based on the principle "The Client is Always Right! (if the client is ready to confirm his rightness with money, i.e. understands that you have to pay for good work). And the programmer, if he takes the job, must realize that he is not doing a favor, but is doing what he takes the money for - makes "the client was satisfied".
P.S. If the performers didn't change their nicknames, then most of the people I dealt with back then are now out of sight. Only one, who did not read my TOR, is still in business.