Monday, April 25, 2011

JamesScw0 (from California, United States) versus Lussay (from Vrancea Romania)

Allegation summary:
The worker, Lussay, alleged that the project was already complete but that the employer, jamescw0, continued to ask for new things. jamescw0 alleged that the project was not complete and that the remaining items were part of the contract.

Friday, April 22, 2011

vWorker discovers PixignStudio failed to meet contract and deadline; Awards arbitration and all funds to registryman

Allegation summary: The employer (registryman of Leicester, United Kingdom) alleged that the worker (PixignStudio of Karachi, Pakistan) did not upload any deliverables to the vWorker site before the project deadline expired. Pixignstudio alleged that registryman didn’t give complete information about the project which is why it wasn’t completed by the deadline.

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

The Review of Dragos’s Behavior in Arbitration

Account Review of Tanasie Dragos Constantin

This account is being reviewed due to the worker's behavior in the arbitration of the project CellarTraks II. The purpose of this review is to determine if the worker should have their account closed due to their behavior in the arbitration.

As documented in the Worker’s Agreement:

Inappropriate Behavior. Should the Worker demonstrate poor or inappropriate behavior (to be determined at the sole discretion of Exhedra), Exhedra reserves the right to publicly document such behavior via a rating and comment in the Worker's profile. Such behavior includes (but is not limited to) losing an arbitration, refusing to cooperate with an arbitration, and sending abusive communications to the other party or to Exhedra staff.

Dragos/Nashoba arbitration summary

Summary of CellarTraks II Arbitration

This project was brought into arbitration by the employer, Nashoba, as a contract dispute in a pre-deadline situation. The employer stated "My worker, dragostanasie, and I are in conflict over payment as the project is almost done but he will not transfer the code to my server without me releasing 75% of the funds." In Arbitration Response Id: 1,518,091, Dragos confirmed that the work uploaded to vworker meets the project requirements 100%. However, the work had not been installed on the employer's environment as required by the project summary and had not been tested. There was still time to complete the work and the goal of the arbitration was to determine the remaining work to be completed, set a new deadline, and then the worker would be given the opportunity to complete the work.

Saturday, April 16, 2011

Discussion board for the Dragos / Nashobawinery arbitration

Background for this posting (this was originally posted on the other blog)

It's good to have a lively back and forth on the Dragos / Nashobawinery arbitration and I appreciate everyone's participation. But I have also received some complaints. Many people subscribed to the blog to get updates about the site and instead are having their feeds and email boxes cluttered with what one described as a "flame war". Others have pointed out that the original topic blog posting (which has long been forgotten) was not about this person's specific arbitration and that this has gone way off topic.

At the same time, the people writing back and forth have their right to express their opinions (as long as they do so with professional language...which I'll address below). Personally, I am disappointed to see several people form such strong opinions after hearing only 1 side of the story and not waiting to actually view the evidence of what happened so they can make up their own minds about what actually happened. They are like jurors who listened to the defendant's story and proclaimed their verdict: before viewing any actual evidence or allowing the prosecution to speak! But if that is what they want to do, then even these people have the right to do that.

So to help both groups, I'm creating a brand new blog posting JUST about the Dragos / Nashobawinery arbitration.

Issues and misconceptions about this arbitration

1) Use of unprofessional or inappropriate language:

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Multiple violated contracts: Lerie Taylor, of San Diego, California and arbitrations he forfeited

This posting concerns three arbitrations involving Lerie Taylor with three different employers on the vWorker site from October 8, 2009 to October 20, 2009. They are labeled as "Arbitration #1 ", "Arbitration #2 ", and "Arbitration #3".

Arbitration 1

Allegation summary:
The worker (Lerie Taylor of San Diego, California) alleged that the work was 100% complete so he should be paid. The employer (bbassett of San Francisco, California) alleged that the work was incomplete and that Lerie Taylor sent “rude emails every minute for hours on some sort of autopilot.”