Failure to fulfil their obligations and refusal to pay back the money - page 21
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
papaklass2012.03.31 21:08
Первый в Вашем списке сторону не выбирал. Вы же, первоначально склонялись на сторону заказчика, я это видел. Даже не много этому удивился. Но потом Вы свернули с первоначально выбранного направления. Так что читаю я внимательно.
The word "first" in your post implies abolk.
"Judge not, and ye shall not be judged" (c)
I just read the thread and I will say the following:
1. I am not on Techno's side. At least I have not seen any argument from Techno's side in my favour. I saw more constructive from the customer's side than from Techno's side.
2. It is possible that I do not understand a lot of things, but I understand one thing:
3. the customer (without exception) gives a disgusting TOR. It is impossible for a developer with such a track record as Techno not to know this.
4. Knowing that the ToR is disgusting, Techno knew what he was getting into. If he knew, he should be ready to different outcomes, to misunderstandings, to rework and to get the contract back (if he has agreed to work apart from the Arbitration, knowing the advantages of the latter).
5. I haven't seen any constructive approach from Techno neither in correspondence with the client, nor here in the topic - just empty words about time schedule, but not a word about the inconsistency of claims of the client with the real state of affairs. Such constructive was neither in correspondence nor here in the topic.
6. Maybe I do not understand something, but the delivery of any work (whether it be a layout or ready-made solutions) consists of an explanation of the rendered solutions to the ToR. Neither in correspondence, nor here in topic from Techno side explanations, that presented them the solution at least partially meets ToR are not given.
7. We can even look at a number of Techno's comments:
_Techno_ 2012.03.31 14:213.31 14:21:03
The complexity of the job for 80-90$ I have set a price of 60$, advance payment was 30$. I could answer questions once a week on the TK. So it is not surprising that some defects (in the sent DEMO version ) stretched for a decent amount of time. My day is even scheduled on the clock. But the last correspondence showed thatmayler like not going to pay 50% extra due to what=s his reasons, and I do not agree to $ 30.
I'm not even going to say that the TOR is a pain in the ass. One thing is written - in fact it's different, the correction is a significant rewrite of the code. And I didn't even have much of a complaint about it, but in the absence of full payment... In short, there is a simple formula: full payment - full work, even if the TOR is no good.
I looked at the negotiations and it is clear that Techno is lying. Customer's reply within 24 hours, Techno's replies with a delay of more than a day. Techno's last reply was on 15 February. Today is March 31 (1.5 months ago).
_Techno_2012.03.31 15:17
If the customer does not want to understand how to officially start the work, then what is the point of forcing him to do the opposite ? I wrote a verbal agreement, it has already been duplicated here. 50% prepayment - demo - another 50% - finished Expert Advisor. I actually followed it. I received the prepayment, sent the demo, and then everything froze on the part of the client.
What do you mean "stalled by the customer's fault"? As long as the thread is not closed, the contractor is responsible for completing the thread. It is clear from the correspondence that it is Techno who has gone into "ignore", not the customer.
_Techno_2012.03.31 16:07
If you send me a demo, it contains only part of what is needed. If given 100% complete work in the demo version, and the unlimited work of the EA is separated by only a couple of restrictions and compiling the code (which these restrictions prevent to remove), then what actually prevents them from simply waiting when there is a suitable decompiler version and just hack the code ... - nothing gets in the way. I've had it all before...
Since when is "demo is part of what's needed"? I agree that the demo can be a limited version, but part of the TOR - I doubt it, otherwise how does the customer check the feasibility of his task.
As far as I'm concerned, it's Techno's fault for the situation.
1. If the assignment is not clear, it should be clarified. Ideally, make up your own task, and get the client to "approve" it. Well, or immediately refuse, if "you can see from the handwriting that there will be problems.
2. If the task is clear, the Expert Advisor should work according to the algorithm. The demo can contain constraints (runtime, external variables, some functions), but it should properly work with the basic functions.
With respect to the free check of ideas - I agree that there is a problem (I know this firsthand). I have solved this issue for myself: partly - the price (tinsel falls away by itself, serious work is more seriously considered), and partly - filtering orders on the sanity (here, of course, only experience will help).
If I were Techno would refund $ 30, just not to waste time and nerves.
I myself returned the prepayment, I think, 2 times: once did not meet the deadline (went on holiday), and the second - underestimated the complexity (in the end returned with compensation, at his own request).
PS: I haven't read the correspondence or the assignment, I haven't checked it. And I won't...
Tack. In addition to the "troll" I have also heard "fool" about myself in the course of 24 hours. What's the personal answer to "white and fluffy" - you're a fool yourself! :)
And fantasy facts must be proved by deeds. Otherwise you and the unused will simply have to be considered a codpiece.
What a straightforward way to think :) Jumping from one topic to another just to find a clue :)
I answer: the smart guy has never written a single program for money in his life. For his interests and income lie in several other areas. It is enough to write programs for free.
As for the "totalitarian approach to nonsense", clever man has intentionally chewed it up in terms you can understand. As you yourself are well aware, chewing it up is not in itself a proof of participation in something.
Turns out I'm not the only one who thinks so.
Since when is "a demo part of what's needed"? I agree that the demo may be a limited version, but part of the ToR I doubt it. Otherwise, how can the customer verify the feasibility of his assignment.
I take 50% advance payment, you take 100%. Of course, in my case, not all items in the ToR are in the demo. All these "rules" once they are outside the service are negotiated individually, so what is the point of giving estimates from the outside? And I did not say that the job can not be done because of the TK, just pointed out that there were problems. And what kind of constructive I lack ? The question was only in the interpretation of "demo", by agreement after sending a demo, full payment is made and the full version is sent. Generally the discussion has no point, and the customer has been agreed upon a long time ago.
I take 50% upfront payment, you 100%. Naturally, in my case, not all points of the ToR are in the demo. All these "rules" once they are outside the service are negotiated individually, so what is the point of giving estimates from the outside? And I did not say that the job can not be done because of the TOR, just pointed out that there were problems. And what kind of constructive I lack ? The question was only in the interpretation of "demo", by agreement after sending a demo, full payment is made and the full version is sent. In general there is no point in having a discussion and the customer has long since been agreed.
With all due respect to you. I am not a customer and am willing to speak the same language as you. The demo version is always a limited version. A limited version is not in the sense of "part", but in the sense of "features". And the prepayment amount has nothing to do with it. So the demo must contain all the points of the TOR. Otherwise, the customer has no reason to pay you the rest of the contract amount. I doubt you don't understand that
If you have agreed with the customer - then let the customer speak out and close the subject.
If you have agreed with the customer - then let the customer speak out and close the subject.
the topic was closed a long time ago ))
...but the judges kept pushing, they got a taste for it and wanted more and more details...
the topic was closed a long time ago ))...
...but the judges were relentless, they got a taste for it and demanded more and more details...
So it was the Bears who joined in "for the honey". And me and Mathemat from early and early dawn.
"I demand to continue the banquet."
So why the fuck are you commenting on a topic you are PRACTICALLY incompetent in? Almost a third of the thread is your meaningless posts