Preston H wrote:
Better job listings are likely to garner a more appropriate and more useful selection of candidates. ... If the client with a brief job posting finds that he is attracting the wrong cross section of candidates because his posting did not provide enough details, then I give him enough credit to believe he will refine
1) A client does not receive the signal of how many freelancers did not apply to the job because those freelancers did NOT apply. They only know who did apply. If the selection is poor, they can't tell if the good ones didn't apply or the good ones don't exist. There is no stat, AFAIK, presented to the client which says that 30 freelancers of the relevant category with 4.5+ rating viewed this page and only 5 applied.
2) If a client does modify their posting, I don't believe that oDesk republishes that modified posting as a new job. So a qualified freelancer who has skipped over a job won't be back to reexamine the post.
Finally, I doubt that you can recall from memory or do a search and find any examples of job postings which did not garner any candidates because they were too vague
That's because oDesk has a surplus of active freelancers, especially new ones, who take a scattershot approach to job applications. So most jobs find applicants.
But the idea is to increase the signal to noise ratio for both freelancers and clients. Your laissez-faire approach doesn't contribute to that goal.
Please understand that writing a proper project description or detailing scope or outlining work requirements all require effort. These things take time and require work and they require knowledge and experience. Ignacio wants all clients to do these things.
We might not be dedicated to the same fields. I can't speak for yours.
I'm a translator.
If a client doesn't state the amount of words that a job takes (and some don't), I've no way of knowing whether that job will take 1 hour or 1 week, and I've no way of knowing whether it's worth applying or not, or what price should I charge.
Considering we have limited applications, that becomes even more significant.
I'm not asking for the client to give extensive information on technical details. I'm asking for him to give proper information on the job he's offering, so I can make a decision.
In PeoplePerHour every time that a client has not indicated a word count or other information, we have directly asked him, and in most occasiones he or she has given an answer that appears publicly in the web. That has worked well for both parties.
That's good thing to Ask.
Well I don't know what happend to post just 20 min ago. It may be eaten by some moderator or Odesk Bots which were shouting this is against our policy so begone.
I asked if you are reallly interested in benefiting us and YOU Are not Becoming Greedy .
Then why dont' you allocate 60 Connects to every one and If someone needs more , He simply contacts you guys. Then after reveiwing his or her proposal you may allocate 10 or 20 more else you may reject it with reason.
2nd thing if my job application remains untouch on your Odesk. then how do you believe this will increase my expertise
It's absolutely disgraceful that you are prepared to completely ignore the fact that none of your freelancers want this change to happen. Any respectful business would back out after seeing the disasterous response.
You work for us you know? We pay you. If membership plans are introduced we will be taking our money elsewhere.