The right to apply for freelance orders is missing. - page 5

New comment
 
Nikolay Ivanov:

Let this requirement be personal to you, since you suggested it ? I think it would be very useful to not make up anything on the fly and consciously give requests.

It's surprising the insolence to look generous and clever at someone else's expense, such useful suggestions are coming from "developers" who have almost no orders...

What are you so excited? I proposed to outline all the rules and live by them, not afraid of an unexpected ban on the purse(
 
Mikhail Dovbakh:
what got you so excited? i suggested outlining all the rules and living by them, rather than fearing an unexpected ban on your wallet(

It's better to move towards improving efficiency "qualitatively", and there are enough quantitative measures, whether it's a freeze, a tax, or even a contribution.

 
Nikolay Ivanov:

it is better to move towards increasing efficiency 'qualitatively', and there are enough quantitative measures, be it a freeze, a tax, or even a contribution.

Where did you see "tax" in my proposals? And there is already a freeze...
My suggestions come down to reducing the irresponsibility of the 'customer' - for those who will actually order, a $10 advance is
is not noticeable and logical. Advance, i.e. it will be taken into account. it is not a tax and not a new commission.) But provocateurs and consultants will diminish.
And if there are additional rules for developers - why not consolidate them in the Code and publish them?
 

Alternatively, take a screenshot of the order and attach it when submitting the application, this will be proof that everything was feng shui at the time of submission

Files:
fr.JPG  86 kb
 
Vitaly Muzichenko:

Alternatively, take a screenshot of the order and attach it to the application, which will prove that everything was fancy at the time of application

but it is impossible to do it programmatically on the website? in your opinion?
 
Mikhail Dovbakh:
Where did you see "tax" in my suggestions? And the freeze is already in place...
My suggestions boil down to reducing the irresponsibility of the "customer" - for those who will actually order, a $10 advance is
is not noticeable and logical. But provocateurs and consultants will be reduced.
And if there are additional rules for developers - why not put them in the Code and publish them?


It is unclear how a developer's fee of $ 1000 will reduce the irresponsibility of the customer.

All the rules for developers are already there, perhaps the only thing missing is clarification of some points.

 
Sorry, but it is the selectivity of the ban and its unpredictability that is most frightening. (
 
Nikolay Ivanov:


It is unclear how a developer fee of $1000 will reduce the customer's irresponsibility.

All the rules for developers are already there, perhaps the only thing missing is clarification in some points.

My advice to you is to read more than just the latest posts if you want a meaningful discussion. Otherwise, you'll end up in a bazaar.
And publish at least one of your code).
 
Mikhail Dovbakh:
Sorry, but it is the selectivity of the ban and its unpredictability that is most frightening. (
Selectivity? We report who we see and who we know about. And then no more "I'm from Petrovich" - if deserved, then punished.
 
Artyom Trishkin:
Selectivity? Whom we see, about whom we know, we report. And then no more "I'm from Petrovich" - if deserved, then as a punishment.
Artem, I really must be missing something.
That's why I was surprised, or rather taken aback, by this topic.
There shouldn't be a double standard.
That said, unpredictability scares me the most.

123456789
New comment