3 ms·

I don't think it's 'fraud', but it's definitely unethical and I wouldn't be surprised if there was some kind of legal action that could be taken. If I ask for a

by powatom 14y ago

I don't think it's 'fraud', but it's definitely unethical and I wouldn't be surprised if there was some kind of legal action that could be taken. If I ask for a gluten free meal, and I don't get a gluten free meal, and that makes me ill, then the person who sold me that meal shouldn't be allowed to just say 'What's the problem? Gluten free meals aren't as nice.'.

brodney 14y ago
Coding in Sinatra over Rails won't make you ill. What are the implications when the only apparent downside is that a non-technical person is getting the product in a different framework than he wanted?
- zem 14y ago
  he might hire someone to maintain it based on their rails experience, for example.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- MrSane 14y ago
  I think that it's simply a matter of getting what you believe you paid for. The implication of an alternative choice may not be clear to the contractor, but it might be important to the non-technical person (even if they don't specifically know what the technology is). Perhaps the non-technical person had a trusted friend who is a Ruby on Rails expert -- and this person was not available at the time of initial development, but available later to maintain the app?
- spitfire 14y ago
  Follow on development, and available talent pool. You wrote a super fast OLTP system in forth? Great! You're a god, but no one can support it or extend it to meet future needs. Perhaps Bob had reasonable expectations that he'd be able to organically grow this app over time. Not being technical he chose a platform which seemed to have a pool of talent available to him. In the small, this was a trivial technical decision. In the large, business picture, that decision might have major negative effects. Bob should have been consulted, and had the decisions explained to him. On the other hand, Bob could have explained his longer term intent to his subordinate and allowed her to make a reasonable decision as long as the tradeoffs were communicated back to him.
- powatom 14y ago
  As somebody else has mentioned - if the customer wants to modify the application later on after the initial contract has ended, and looks for somebody experienced in what they believe they had initially been sold, then that is a costly process, both in terms of time and money. We don't work in a bubble - our decisions have impacts long after we've ended our own contract with clients. Clients should be given exactly what they're expecting. If you think the client should go a different route, then you should explain that to the client, and document exactly what the final product will be. Even if the difference doesn't make you 'ill', it is simply unethical to sell somebody something they're not expecting - whether you believe it's better or not.
fallenhitokiri 14y ago
Legal actions would only be possible if a spoken wish, which is not part of the written contract, can be used as a basis for a lawsuit in Germany. I know that it was "only spoken", but I do not know the legal possibilities we have here.
- guan 14y ago
  Most oral contracts can be enforced in most countries, including Germany. It might be hard to establish that it was part of the contract. For example, if you spend a lot of time negotiating a contract, and both parties put a bunch of stuff into the text during the negotiation, then it might appear that anything discussed orally but not written down is not part of the contract.

by powatom 14y ago

brodney 14y ago

Coding in Sinatra over Rails won't make you ill. What are the implications when the only apparent downside is that a non-technical person is getting the product in a different framework than he wanted?

zem 14y ago
he might hire someone to maintain it based on their rails experience, for example.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
MrSane 14y ago
I think that it's simply a matter of getting what you believe you paid for. The implication of an alternative choice may not be clear to the contractor, but it might be important to the non-technical person (even if they don't specifically know what the technology is). Perhaps the non-technical person had a trusted friend who is a Ruby on Rails expert -- and this person was not available at the time of initial development, but available later to maintain the app?
spitfire 14y ago
Follow on development, and available talent pool. You wrote a super fast OLTP system in forth? Great! You're a god, but no one can support it or extend it to meet future needs. Perhaps Bob had reasonable expectations that he'd be able to organically grow this app over time. Not being technical he chose a platform which seemed to have a pool of talent available to him. In the small, this was a trivial technical decision. In the large, business picture, that decision might have major negative effects. Bob should have been consulted, and had the decisions explained to him. On the other hand, Bob could have explained his longer term intent to his subordinate and allowed her to make a reasonable decision as long as the tradeoffs were communicated back to him.
powatom 14y ago
As somebody else has mentioned - if the customer wants to modify the application later on after the initial contract has ended, and looks for somebody experienced in what they believe they had initially been sold, then that is a costly process, both in terms of time and money. We don't work in a bubble - our decisions have impacts long after we've ended our own contract with clients. Clients should be given exactly what they're expecting. If you think the client should go a different route, then you should explain that to the client, and document exactly what the final product will be. Even if the difference doesn't make you 'ill', it is simply unethical to sell somebody something they're not expecting - whether you believe it's better or not.

fallenhitokiri 14y ago

Legal actions would only be possible if a spoken wish, which is not part of the written contract, can be used as a basis for a lawsuit in Germany. I know that it was "only spoken", but I do not know the legal possibilities we have here.

guan 14y ago
Most oral contracts can be enforced in most countries, including Germany. It might be hard to establish that it was part of the contract. For example, if you spend a lot of time negotiating a contract, and both parties put a bunch of stuff into the text during the negotiation, then it might appear that anything discussed orally but not written down is not part of the contract.