Service Work: Towards re-shaping the Top Developers towards professionalism - 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
Exactly what he had in mind. It all started with his posthttps://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/9279/page8#comment_389032 after a 5 day hibernation. If he hadn't started asking what rating tweaks are, the topic would have died.
By the way, you seem to have missed this one ;), so you haven't answered the question and keep writing rubbish.
In fact, the importance of the rating is greatly overestimated. I started half a year ago with a 0 rating. Now I'm in 3rd place. My work from this (from the rating) did not become more. Even think the opposite :).
But the statistics on the developers can be expanded. I suggested, for example, making information on the number of arbitration jobs available. In my opinion, this is a very "telling" indicator.
And I posted in this thread for one simple reason. I don't like it when people ask questions and express doubts and suspicions to customers and not to whom they should have been asked and expressed.
In this case, I'm talking about the developer number 2 in the top, who, instead of asking me how to get 200 jobs at $100 a pop, tells my customers that it looks "very suspicious" and they should be more careful with me. I understand that envy is difficult to contain, but everything must have limits.
Abolk, what do you think?You don't have to answer now. It's clear to everyone here.
I used to shoot bears on a four in the smoking room.)
Exactly what he had in mind. It all started with his posthttps://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/9279/page8#comment_389032 after a 5 day hibernation. If he hadn't started asking what rating tweaks are, the topic would have died.
I don't know who had anything to do with it then )
Top developers are becoming increasingly inaccessible to newbies. There are not only amateurs among newbies, but also professional developers who write in mcl4/5 outside the service. For them, the Top is also inaccessible.
There are two ways to get into the top: 1) outright dumping and 2) cheating.
Examples of outright dumping are obvious. Just go to any application and you can see price bids - one less than the other. Perhaps lowering the price of development is a good thing. Perhaps it is the right thing to do - less money will be thrown away on the chimera of the financial markets. But because of low development prices specialists will leave the service. There are examples when specialists leave the service, or come and turn around.
Lower prices and specialists' departure will inevitably lead to the degradation of the service as a professional service provider.
There are examples of mark-ups and they are obvious.
The methodology of formation of the Top in its current form is exhausted. Top only on one indicator "number of jobs" generates contradictions, which in the near future will have to be resolved. The number of completed jobs in the conditions of dumping and markups - is not an indicator of professionalism.
There is a need to move to an integral indicator of the top, which forms the top on a professional basis. For example, you can include in the top of the presence of articles as with 5 and 4 (this will make the service available to "old" professionals with 4k). The Top by professional will allow to redirect efforts from dumping and scoring to writing articles, for example.
Who thinks so?
I don't know who had anything to do with it.)
You quoted my first post verbatim. If you look at the title of the thread and the content of my 1st post, then:
-- the only issue raised was the introduction of multi-factor TOP in order to minimise dumping and level out scamming.
Who could have imagined that:
1. Wahoo instead of creating his own popular topic - repurposed my topic with his question into "Topping for beginners and beyond"
2. Sanyok had then exposed the facts and scale of active conversion of funds in especially large amounts through the Jobs service.
3. Then there were frank admissions from forum members that the run-through service is there and it is often used
How I knew, that according to Wahoo, it was enough to knock in his personal message and he would have paid me the silence and warranty not to raise the issue of TOPZ for half a year.
Since Alexey deleted my reply, I will finish it here:
The last logical assumption was made on the basis of two statements and one consequence:
The 1st statement here https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/9279/page9#comment_389126:"Why didn't you ask me your questions?" Premise: "Contact me".
2nd statement here https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/9279/page23#comment_389978:"So, 100 for the advisor + 100 for not giving it to anyone +50 for not disappearing for a year." Parcel: "Example precedent."
-- An investigation (similar example parcel here https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/9279/page26#comment_390019).
abolk - you are sick. This is a precedent WHEN I was paid. Not me. Do you want to pay me so you don't bring up TOP again? I won't say no again.
Wahoo - you are hopelessly ill when you come at me with your bullshit. "As it goes, so it goes." In opening this thread I did not intend to find out anything about your genius work in the Jobs service. You brought it up yourself and promoted the topic around your person. "Don't blame the mirror when you're wrong." Yeah, and it's true what they say: "A thief's hat's on fire".
Wahoo - I've closed the subject for myself. The community's attention to the problem of calculating the TOP has been drawn, the debate is over. My goals and objectives have been achieved. I have nothing to do with you personally.
How was I to know that, according to Wahoo, all I had to do was knock on his door and he would have paid me in silence and a guarantee not to raise the issue of TOP for half a year.
Сервис Работа: К вопросу переформатирования Топа разработчиков в сторону профессионализма
Well, you decide for yourselves the degree of our "professionalism". ,,what are the criteria for selection?
,,roughly speaking it is necessary to put "sieve" -: large at 5, small at 3, well, and beginners by a ruble (example). thus in front of the customer is drawn a clearer picture of the choice, with what and who to contact.
How was I to know that, according to Wahoo, all I had to do was knock on his door and he would have paid me silence and a guarantee not to bring up TOP for half a year.
2. Then Sanyok's research exposed the facts and the scale of the active diversion of funds on a particularly large scale through the Jobs service.
3. Then there were frank admissions from forum participants that the transfer of funds through the service takes place and it is often used
I do not understand. What is the problem or a violation if the parties involved in carrying out an order through the service?
They are designed for this very purpose, one person pays, the other receives, both can go to arbitration.
What's up? /**/ Do you have a problem with it?
New chart )
Sector 1 - fast and inexpensive
Sector 2 - fast and expensive
Sector 3 - slow and expensive
Sector 4 - slow and not expensive
Slow - above average 6.7 days
Fast - time below average 6.7 days
Expensive - more expensive than average 70-75 credits.
Not expensive - cheaper than average 70-75 credits
ZZZY: Definitely will not complete the study once 1-2 months will recalculate the data, I think to create a branch such as: "Alternative top developers
ZZZY:
Picture with billiard balls best :). I think I'll put it sometime in my profile if you do not mind :)
I want to warn you that in the calculations may be wrong and the picture can real differ from this, as well here filtered performers with the number of orders of less than 28 works and those whose performance time of less than 1 day. Calculations do not take into account the amount of work performed, only the cost and timing of the work.
balloon size takes into account the amount of work done, not as nice as with equal size).
I do not understand . What is the problem or breach if the parties order through the service?
That's what the service is for, one pays and the other receives, both can go to arbitration.
You what? /**/ What's wrong with you?
That's the prince convulsing ;)
Now you either have to prove it or shoot yourself.
we'll never know the denouement... too bad.
Definitely will not complete the study once 1-2 months will recalculate the data, I think I will create a branch such as: "Alternative top developers" ?
The picture with the cue balls is the best :). I think I'll put it in my profile sometime, if you don't mind :)
The 2nd statement here https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/9279/page23#comment_389978:"So, 100 for the EA + 100 for not giving it to anyone +50 for not disappearing within a year." Parcel: "Example of a precedent.