The right to apply for freelance orders is missing. - page 2
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
https://www.mql5.com/ru/job/95788/discussion?id=450306
There are nine people checked in. Did all nine fall under the radar?
I really hope that the right to apply for freelance jobs will one day be restored, because even prison is not imprisoned forever, but only for a certain period of time )
Because if there are complaints about such cases (especially if there are many complaints), then everyone reacts here (and the complaints are seen by all, incl. admins), and can be removed from freelancing.
To avoid this (I do not know about your case, I - in general), then do not sign up for work, where the customer provided the contact details, or asks something (like - give a link to the profile, etc.) before choosing, or else, or decompile the file, etc.
Because if there are complaints on such cases (especially if there are many complaints), then everyone reacts here (and the complaints are seen by all, including admins), and can be removed from freelancing.
Thanks for the answer, "or decompile the file" - apparently this is my case, not having realized that they offer a decompiled file, although after realizing this fact - I rejected my application. Also in wordpress offered to work, details offered through the mail - probably because of this too, there too the application for work canceled. I also applied for work in foreign languages, one Chinese customer's request was rejected because of too much work, and translator was unable to translate my texts.
Don't repeat my mistake - read the text of the order carefully before you apply for it!https://www.mql5.com/ru/job/97313 for example here they immediately ask for a link to the profile, I deleted my application
https://www.mql5.com/ru/job/97072 also offer to contact someone on the side, I have deleted my application.
In a month's time, they might give the license back - if the administration sees remorse.
Are you saying this on behalf of the administration? If so, can you tell me how to make sure she sees it?
The problem is that I have to read a lot and delve into the task on the merits, so I automatically miss insignificant phrases such as "If there are any questions ...". So I missed it by accident.
The abuser would have done things differently: they wouldn't have submitted the request, but would have contacted the customer. So, in fact, innocent people got hurt. And the service suffered a loss - I now have 4 personal requests for example.
This problem can in most cases be solved by setting a filter before the order is published.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/job/95788/discussion?id=450306
You do not get your licence back instantly. In order to avoid being shoved into every job indiscriminately in the future, sit for at least a month with your licence suspended. After a month, maybe return the rights - if the administration sees remorse.
Dear administration and moderators.
In my humble opinion a violation of the rules on the part of applicants in the above application to put it mildly "pulled by the ears".
Given that this order was published March 23, 2019 and all bidders for this ill-fated order that everyone has already managed to forget about got a ban after about a month (about 16-17 April), while the reasons for the ban according to the highlighted paragraphs of the rules is highly questionable. Begs the conclusion that someone creates the appearance of work. Nowhere in the rules is specified that if the applicant leaves a request in the order (in which the customer has indicated any of his contact information), then it is an offense on the part of the applicant. Why did the freelance moderators suddenly decide after almost a month that bidders (all without exception) exchange contact details with this requester?
If moderators have any suspicions about requesters, the decision about a ban should probably be made on the basis of the relevant clauses of the rules.
If Priv. administration decided to tighten the conditions of freelance service, then these intentions should be reflected in a more detailed and clear description of the rules.
The answer to freelancers in the style of "in a month maybe they will return the rights - if the board sees remorse" in this situation in my opinion does not withstand any criticism.
Answer in servicedesk on the question "when will be resumed the opportunity to place requests in orders?" did not get, so please resume the ability to place requests in orders for all banned applicants in the above order.
Thank you.