here's a new job for $10. Has something changed in the job service ? - page 7
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
What were the bans/blocks:
-- ban for signing a bid with the customer's contact listed -- violation of point 2 "no exchange of contacts in any form"
Blocking for this, in my opinion, is... Well, how can I put it so mildly ...
If the customer indicates the contact information in the application and the performer does not respond to these contacts offers to perform the work without leaving the service, is not a plus for the performer? In this case there is no need for dishonest performer to sign the request. Isn't it obvious?
1. bullshit! Signing up for a job does not say that you are ready to accept the terms of the customer, and the contact details have nothing to do with the job.
I got a ban for signing up (I don't remember exactly, maybe I didn't read the TOR carefully and pressed yes), but I didn't even get a response from the customer or anything, and if I'm not mistaken I haven't even seen the decompile.
Well the ban was lifted recently, I won't say anything about it, but the fact remains...
Blocking for this, in my opinion, is... well, how shall I put it gently...
If the customer indicates the contact information in the application and the performer does not respond to these contact information offers to perform the work without leaving the service, is this not a plus for the performer? In that case a dishonest performer has no need to sign the request. Isn't it obvious?
I'm just pointing out that blocking for that reason is outlined in the service's rules.
I don't know why it happened and why it caused an "emotional hysteria" in the form of discontent, disputes, quarrels, exaggerations, misunderstanding and regrets.
As an example, look at how the resource removed the policy:
-warned in advance what you can and can't do, set a time limit for the ban.
-- as a result, they eliminated the policy without any discussion at all, by banning just three or four people.
-by the way, it was my idea -- it was completely done in my scenario.
That's what you should have done here, too:
-- first a warning explaining what's what and how it's gonna be
-- then maybe I wouldn't need a ban -- people aren't stupid - they take freelance seriously, rules are rules
There are seven more freelance ban applicants in the pipeline... I'm sorry.
There are 7 more freelance ban contenders on the line... I'm sorry.
If that's what you mean, here's Fisher (link removed by Artyom Trishkin), but who will look into it )))
P.S. There are sites on the net with sources on Fisher.
(Frankly speaking sometimes it already looks like punishment, some links are quite in context and do not harm the resource)
If that's what you mean, here's Fisher, but who's going to sort it out )))
By the way, here's another questionable situation for service reprisals.
There is a decompiled indicator in the archive, the decompiled indicator is not mentioned in the request. The Executor looked at the code of indicator mentioned in the application and that's all... What is the contractor going to work with??? Will someone deal with it???
As for the bans/blocks in Freelance we've been actively talking about lately -- not a single ban/block has gone around the stated rules of Freelance.
Yes? There was also the case of the "I pay $10 and I don't give any more" customer. I don't know if people got banned or not and what happened to them now. If you are right, it's a good thing.
-----------
The Freelance service is quite convenient for ordering, namely:
Well uncomfortable delay of 7 days, but you can survive it, especially if you work all the time.
-----------
If to consider freelance as work, here the main minus - can sharply dismiss. Imagine: you work in a cantor and then in the middle of the day they fire you and send you home, and you can't even imagine that this can happen. (I do not take into account habitual abusers who deliberately try to commit illegal actions). The issue is that the attractiveness of such work is falling, which means less professionals will want to work on a regular basis, more as a hobby, a pastime.
If that's not the case now - I'd be very happy, but there's a lot to think from the rhetoric on the forum.
Yes? There was also the case of the "I pay $10 and no more" customer. ...
If you look at "completed" jobs in Freelance Service for all time - then not one or two jobs where the client writes "I'll pay 10$ for no more" - and then the work was done perfectly well for 30$ and much more.
About Freelance service there is a strong belief that here for $10 they do tasks of any complexity. When the text of the developer's application was open to all, the text "I'll do it for $ 10, because I gain statistics" - was not uncommon.
Also, customers often have a misunderstanding of the complexity of the task. Developers with the lowest skill level (having a free entrance to the service) do not understand the complexity of those tasks, for which they are taking on.
You should always look at the ToR and have a conversation.
And in exactly less than a minute to review terms of reference, write your price - and then let the customer decide. If he agrees, then further look at the ToR in detail, and communicate. If he does not agree, he can delete his request and forget about it.
But if we have to tear off the customer and the developer for every "I'll pay 10$ and no more" request? Then you know ... .
If you look at "completed" jobs in Freelance Service for all time - not one or two jobs where the customer writes "I'll pay $10 and no more" - and then the work was perfectly performed for $30 and much more.
About Freelance service there is a strong belief that here for $10 they do tasks of any complexity. When the text of the developer's application was open to all, the text "I'll do it for $ 10, because I gain statistics" - was not uncommon.
Also, customers often have a misunderstanding of the complexity of the task. Developers of the lowest skill level (having a free entrance to the service) do not understand the complexity of those tasks, for which they are taking on.
You should always look at the ToR and have a conversation.
And in exactly less than a minute to review terms of reference, write your price - and then let the customer decide. If he agrees, then further look at the ToR in detail, and communicate. If he does not agree, he can delete his request and forget about it.
But if we have to tear off the customer and the developer for every "I'll pay 10$ and no more" request? Then you know ... .
No, I'm for a specific showdown in another thread about such an order (can not remember the name)
Now Freelance has another extreme - they have set the minimum price of $30 - and the addition to previously made EA must be done on the side, because the service requires at least $30, and the attempt to hide such an order as "translation" for $10 - are going to be suspended from participation in the service.
Renat, when introducing a minimum, promised to think about the cost for small tasks. It's been a year now.
There is a problem and it should be solved by the service, not repressed by developers and customers who just want to work through the service.