When I go to All Contracts, I see a one star review. I was nervous about this, but that is what I gave my client. Is that one star under All Contracts what I gave them or what they gave me?
Honestly, I wasn't sure what all those catagories meant, specifically Skills and Quality of Requirements.
The job was to transcribe and they required the first five minutes to review before proceeding. I sent the first five and never heard back. They had a noon deadline to complete, so after reaching out multiple times I had to risk moving ahead. I sent the completed work, and they were happy.
But they tacked on another unrealistic milestone/escrow that paid even less, and a timeline I couldn't take. I reached out again to negotiate but they never replied. Finally, less than two hours before the deadline I didn't accpet, they checked to see (I guess my progress) and saw I'd negotiated for better pay and longer timeline. They flipped out, insulted me, and said they were taking business elsewhere. They requested the escrow returned. I replied back but never heard from them again.
I'm not trying tp punish them and I want more work. I'd happily give them higher ratings, but other freelancers here have asked me to give an honest review. Maybe if I understood what Skills and Quality of Requirements for a client referred to, I'd want to change it.
Any advice is appreciated. Thanks.
They're rather subjective. Skills is one of those where I'm always befuddled and usually choose a rating that reflects my overall opinion of the client. Quality of Requirements is easy for me: did the client clearly, concisely, and accurately write out what they need or did I have to do an overly involved amount of discovery to glean their needs from various thought fragments and rambling non sequiturs? Did know the job requirements at the start or did I have to pull it out of them with all sorts of witchcraft and psychology?
Witchcraft and psychology, LOL. Well, they just sent me two links to YouTube to transcribe, the milestone they ignored and a tight deadline. The rest was up to me.The low pay was made lower by thier lack of communication. There was also my concern that they required a portion transcribed before I continued, then never acknowledging it, even after teh completion deadline had passed. I was concerned they were actually trying to make me fail so they didn't have to pay. I have no evidence of this, beyond acknowledging most people are nuts.
The next unapproved escrow were several more links with much more work, they stated less pay then posted less to escrow, and never responded to my counteroffer until the next day. I'd had to have stayed up all night to complete the assignment, then work the next day too.
Another reason I was hesitant was because I started to believe they had me transcribing with intention of writing an ebook using other people's lectures. Not illegal I suppose, but not much integrity either. The topic was consistent, and they are on LinkedIn where their background implies this too.
In short, there was almost no communication beyond "do this by this time" then adding the second escrow the same way, then beraiting me when they saw my counter offer instead of a completed assignment for wages illegal here since the Great Depression. But I don't want to one star them for no reason. Do you feel I did? That's an honest question.
I'd never work with them again under any circumstances, but if you or others would, I'll increase their rating. I'm new here, but I've had my fair share of crappy clients. I'm still trying to find where the line is here. Thanks.