A new perspective ...
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2005
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 61953
interpreted = N
texte = > From Charles: > I think the deal here is that WebDNA has a smaller user base and you > ARE on the DEVELOPER LIST here, so I think the difference is you are > asking other developers to hire you, not end users with a need. > From Jesse: > I believe you would be more successful if we could see your > "portfolio". But, if you choose not to, then that's your prerogative. > I'm just trying to help you understand why I don't think your > business model has been successful in this community. > From Charles: > When I enlist the help of other developers, I assume they are WORKING > FOR ME and I would NEVER hire anyone without seeing what kind of code > they write. Thanks Charles and Jesse, I can see now why I have failed to sell my services to you guys, and possibly to others on this list. I never anticipated that my programmer's code would be that important to you, especially when you know I trained them myself, and you know (or you should by now) I use very efficient coding techniques, and you know that I personally guarantee their code to work properly. Then again, you have every right to see my programmer's actual code before you hire us to work for you -- I do not deny this! It's just too bad that I don't have any examples for you right now. But what's really disappointing is that my suggestion to hire us to do a small programming test for you is out of the question, or out of your reach financially. I actually thought you might look at it like this: "Let's see ... we charge $35 an hour, so if Ken's programmers can do the same work for $10 an hour that's a savings of $25 per hour, or $200 a day, or $1000 a week, or $50,000 a year. Not a bad deal if his guys can really do the work ... "So am I willing to risk 50 bucks to give his programmers a 5 hour test? This $50 investment may pay me back 1000 times over by the end of the year if I hire just ONE of his programmers full time. So I guess it's worth a shot." Of course I was wrong in my other assumptions about the way people think on this list, so I'm not surprised that I misinterpreted this as well. But I will certainly consider having my programmers do some coding examples some day. Just tell me what kind of examples will satisfy you, thanks! :) Sincerely, Kenneth Grome www.kengrome.com ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list
. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
> From Charles: > I think the deal here is that WebDNA has a smaller user base and you > ARE on the DEVELOPER LIST here, so I think the difference is you are > asking other developers to hire you, not end users with a need. > From Jesse: > I believe you would be more successful if we could see your > "portfolio". But, if you choose not to, then that's your prerogative. > I'm just trying to help you understand why I don't think your > business model has been successful in this community. > From Charles: > When I enlist the help of other developers, I assume they are WORKING > FOR ME and I would NEVER hire anyone without seeing what kind of code > they write. Thanks Charles and Jesse, I can see now why I have failed to sell my services to you guys, and possibly to others on this list. I never anticipated that my programmer's code would be that important to you, especially when you know I trained them myself, and you know (or you should by now) I use very efficient coding techniques, and you know that I personally guarantee their code to work properly. Then again, you have every right to see my programmer's actual code before you hire us to work for you -- I do not deny this! It's just too bad that I don't have any examples for you right now. But what's really disappointing is that my suggestion to hire us to do a small programming test for you is out of the question, or out of your reach financially. I actually thought you might look at it like this: "Let's see ... we charge $35 an hour, so if Ken's programmers can do the same work for $10 an hour that's a savings of $25 per hour, or $200 a day, or $1000 a week, or $50,000 a year. Not a bad deal if his guys can really do the work ... "So am I willing to risk 50 bucks to give his programmers a 5 hour test? This $50 investment may pay me back 1000 times over by the end of the year if I hire just ONE of his programmers full time. So I guess it's worth a shot." Of course I was wrong in my other assumptions about the way people think on this list, so I'm not surprised that I misinterpreted this as well. But I will certainly consider having my programmers do some coding examples some day. Just tell me what kind of examples will satisfy you, thanks! :) Sincerely, Kenneth Grome www.kengrome.com ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Kenneth Grome
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
Security Hole - NetCloak Update (1998)
Hummm .... (2002)
Bit off subject -- Faxing orders (1997)
reserved characters for field names? (1998)
Dreamweaver Integration (1998)
Practice runs ? (1997)
[protect] locks out anyone (2003)
RE: Re:Signal Raised (1997)
problem with [Format Days_To_Date] (2000)
Separate SSL Server (1997)
Purchased cart being overwritten (1997)
Calculating multiple shipping... (1997)
Math (1997)
WebCat2: Items xx to xx shown, etc. (1997)
French characters in variables (2001)
[WebDNA] Forum Module Made In WebDNA (2020)
writing db to disk (1997)
Problems passing [SKU] with $Replace in 2.0 (1997)
Error 551 (2000)
New Command prefs ... (1997)