13 ms·
This is a fundamentally broken model. You get a good developer they fix the issue in a minute get $1. You get a not-so-good one they take all day and bankrupt
by new_guy 6y ago
This is a fundamentally broken model.
You get a good developer they fix the issue in a minute get $1.
You get a not-so-good one they take all day and bankrupt you.
You have an expectation mismatch, you pay the developers for their value not their time.
Better to have a model like Quirky did, $80 flat rate or something and obviously filter out the bad developers on sign up.
- atleta 6y agoThe problem is, that no one can give you (or themselves) a reasonable estimate on how much it will take (and thus how much it should cost) to fix an issue in an unknown codebase. The mismatch is easily done away with by adding ratings to the system. So much so, than on similar platforms, if you are unlucky and run into a hard issue/prick customer (or some combination of this) too early then it can ruin your chances forever. (It does matter a lot whether you get your 1 out of 100 3* ratings as the first one or the 100th one.)