Freelancing and arbitration. Something has to change, otherwise it's a dead end! - 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
I agree that the problem needs to be addressed in a broader sense. I have the same problem, but on the other hand: the client confirmed the demonstration for compliance with the terms of reference, received the source code and disappeared without confirmation of handover.
He got what he wanted, but what should I do? More than a week has passed. Please solve my problem:https://www.mql5.com/ru/job/116100.
And for the future to introduce a rule, if one of the parties in a week does not take a decision on the option proposed by the other side to complete the work in the arbitration, to take the proposed option automatically. And maybe block or delete the accounts of such careless users.
The negligent one here is you as the developer.
Look at the layout sensibly -- you, having done dozens of jobs, know the service -- the customer came to the service for the first time and the service does not know.
As you say "approved the TOR, got the source code" - so he confirmed the stage and thought that "that's it" - you gave him the source code, the money is blocked (and in his mind - written off/paid) - and he leaves the service, honestly convinced that he does not owe neither you nor the service.
So dialog with the customer, warn him about the next step - tell him that the Expert Advisor is uploaded, but there are so many confirmations that you need to do to finish the job - and so on all points.
You're being unhelpful here as a developer.
Look at the situation sensibly -- you have done dozens of jobs, you know the service -- the customer came to the service for the first time and does not know the service.
As you say "confirmed the TOR, got the source code" - so he confirmed the stage and thought that "that's it" - you gave him the source code, the money is blocked (and in his mind - written off/paid) - and he leaves the service, sincerely convinced that he does not owe neither you nor the service.
So dialog with your customers and warn them about your next step - tell them that the Expert Advisor is submitted, but they need to do so many confirmations to complete the job and so on.
You seem to be even more careless.
What I have described and you have confirmed is a common problem of the service, not the specific implementer. It should therefore be solved by the service.
And who told you that I do not engage in dialogue? It does not help in such cases: a dialogue cannot be conducted if the other party refuses to do so.
In addition to the previously suggested: the service can confirm the transfer of work automatically after a week, if the performer has disappeared after confirming the transfer of work by the customer.
...
And who told you that I don't engage in dialogue? It doesn't help in such cases: dialogue is impossible if the other side refuses to do so.
you look at the way you treat everything:
... block or delete the accounts of such careless users.
... A general problem of the service, not a specific performer. Therefore should be solved by the service.
You seem to be even more negligent. ...
There's a popular wisdom: "Who fucked up? Daughter-in-law".
You have a service with problems, the customer (like everyone else) is negligent.
No wonder the customer does not want to communicate with you and the arbitrator of the service.
You sit alone then, you good-for-nothing, and scratch your head.
No wonder the customer doesn't want to communicate with you - and neither does the arbitrator of the service.
Don't judge it by yourself. You seem to be the only one who doesn't want to communicate (which is mutual). If you have nothing substantive to say, don't litter the thread.
Don't judge it by yourself. You seem to be the only one who doesn't want to communicate (which is mutual). If you have nothing substantive to say, don't litter the thread.
By the way, it's not hard to make a cause-effect analogy -- between what's being said here https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/285790/page2#comment_10910081..:
...to remove the completely sad performers?
and what you're saying:
... maybe block or delete the accounts of such careless users.
You know what I used to do sometimes when a customer caused some kind of embarrassment...
I would hand over closed code - so that the person could verify everything and make the money transfer. And I would write him that after the money was transferred to me, I would give him the source code.
But that's not the interesting part. The interesting thing is that in transferred closed code there was a running time limit built in - from the day of transfer and until the end of the week. Then the program would generate a message like "I must transfer the money for the work not to offend the developer" and would be unloaded.
You know, it saved me more than once.
You know what I used to do sometimes when a customer caused some kind of embarrassment...
I would hand over the closed code - so that the person could check everything and make the money transfer. And I would write him that after the money was transferred to me, I would give him the source code.
But that's not the interesting part. The interesting thing is that in transferred closed code there was a running time limit built in - from the day of transfer and until the end of the week. Then the program would generate a message like "I'd like to give some money for the work, so as not to offend the programmer" and would be unloaded.
You know, more than once saved.
Yes, it's the easiest and most reliable option, the demo is limited in time.
I'll ask here too, Artem, maybe you know, why they demanded source code from me already after cancellation of work with division of money in two parts? Is it written in rules?
If it's for arbitration and adjudication, how can it be done if the job is already cancelled and the money is split?
If suddenly the customer mixed up the button, then why not roll back the process, it's not like I'm refusing arbitration, let them check my code.
But I'm fundamentally uncomfortable with being asked for a code after "cancelling the job and splitting the money in half".
But it's easier of course to ban, I think they didn't even understand my TOR and my demo.
Yes, it's the easiest and most reliable option, the demo is limited in time.
I'll ask here too, Artem, do you even know why I was asked for the source code after the job was cancelled and the money was split in half? Is it written in the rules?
If it's for arbitration and adjudication, how can it be done if the job is already cancelled and the money is split?
If suddenly the customer mixed up the button, then why not roll back the process, it's not like I'm refusing arbitration, let them check my code.
But I'm fundamentally uncomfortable with being asked for a code after "cancelling the job and splitting the money in half".
But it's easier of course to ban, I think they didn't even understand the TOR and my demo.