[KɪɴG]

As of right now, thread link can be added only at the start of the contract. You cannot add it later on.

But, Imagine a situation where the seller forgets to add a link to his/her thread in the contract.
Once the contract is completed and a buyer wants to leave his vouch on the seller's thread, they won't be able to and most likely end up receiving a warning because that thread was not part of the contract.

This problem can be resolved if the option to add a thread link is visible even when the contract is in process or once it's marked as completed.

Why this should be done?
It will make the contract system more user friendly and flexible.

Update: Please read my 2nd post on this thread before saying anything.

[Eagle 95]

This is very open to abuse of the system. Also, you're a vendor, you can include TID in the contract template so you have no excuse to "forget it".

[Charger]

But, Imagine a situation where the seller forgets to add a link to his/her thread in the contract.

Then neither party should accept the contract.

[Twiggy]

cool idea but not sure if they will add it

[KɪɴG]

This is very open to abuse of the system. Also, you're a vendor, you can include TID in the contract template so you have no excuse to "forget it".

Chances of abuse of this feature are very slim, I'm sure any seller wouldn't want to ruin their reputation for just one contract, but if anyone is caught up abusing this feature they should receive a harsh punishment (Like fake contracts). After all, this feature is about providing more flexibility to all users (not just Vendor).

[Eagle 95]

Chances of abuse of this feature are very slim, I'm sure any seller wouldn't want to ruin their reputation for just one contract, but if anyone is caught up abusing this feature they should receive a harsh punishment (Like fake contracts). After all, this feature is about providing more flexibility to all users (not just Vendor).

Why do you think it'd be only 1 contract? Lol. You'd be amazed how many PMs I got and still getting why they can't include their contracts from the past. I see what you're aiming here but I you don't see my side. From my side that's being irresponsible and not knowing policies with a high potential for abuse. As Charger said, contract should be denied if there's some mistake.

Also, what about a scenario where a seller wants to transfer his "vouchers"? At first only a few were a contracted customer with TID and then sometimes happens, thread gets closed and he takes the other bunch to use for his next thread.

[Xerotic]

So you want to alter a contract after it has been accepted by both parties? I don't think you understand the term contract.

If you don't like the terms of a contract then don't accept it. If you "forget" a simple thread link constantly then your buyers have a lot more to worry about than accidentally being a non-contracted vouch.

What's more is that the default behavior for the contract button is to fill in the thread link. So when members don't add a contract button to Marketplace threads, one is automatically added. And it links the thread. You literally have to go out of your way to not link the thread.

Example: https://hackforums.net/showthread.php?tid=6080248

-

This contract button was added automatically upon thread creation.


-

When clicked, observe the URL:


-

And then three separate pages where you can confirm thread data during the contract creation process:




-

I think a better suggestion is for you to pay more attention when doing deals.

[HᴇʀᴍᴇS]

Despise the reality of us knowing we should make sure before accepting, this would be a nice add.

I can't tell you how many deals I have quickly done and forgot to add or didn't notice the other party didn't add it.

Would be dope to see, even if it required for them to reaccept the contract.

[webdev77]

Despise the reality of us knowing we should make sure before accepting, this would be a nice add.

I can't tell you how many deals I have quickly done and forgot to add or didn't notice the other party didn't add it.

Would be dope to see, even if it required for them to reaccept the contract.

Personally I would never deal with someone that can't handle putting a link in a box. If that's the bar you set for dealing with customers, that's on you.

[KɪɴG]

Why do you think it'd be only 1 contract? Lol. You'd be amazed how many PMs I got and still getting why they can't include their contracts from the past. I see what you're aiming here but I you don't see my side. From my side that's being irresponsible and not knowing policies with a high potential for abuse. As Charger said, contract should be denied if there's some mistake.

Also, what about a scenario where a seller wants to transfer his "vouchers"? At first only a few were a contracted customer with TID and then sometimes happens, thread gets closed and he takes the other bunch to use for his next thread.

I can understand how frustrating it must be for you to handle all these PM's. This suggestion is in no way about allowing these members to abuse the system. Thanks for highlighting this. There are two possibilities to reduce the abusing of this new feature by almost 100%. (Posting below).

So you want to alter a contract after it has been accepted by both parties? I don't think you understand the term contract.

If you don't like the terms of a contract then don't accept it. If you "forget" a simple thread link constantly then your buyers have a lot more to worry about than accidentally being a non-contracted vouch.

What's more is that the default behavior for the contract button is to fill in the thread link. So when members don't add a contract button to Marketplace threads, one is automatically added. And it links the thread. You literally have to go out of your way to not link the thread.

Example: https://hackforums.net/showthread.php?tid=6080248

-

This contract button was added automatically upon thread creation.


-

When clicked, observe the URL:


-

And then three separate pages where you can confirm thread data during the contract creation process:




-

I think a better suggestion is for you to pay more attention when doing deals.

No, the purpose of this suggestion is not to encourage members to alter a contract. It's more like fixing a problem in the contract if it has occurred unintentionally. Not 100% of contracts are started directly through the thread button.

Here's usually what happens:

Scenario 1 where 100% of contracts are started through a button:
Usually when a thread is about Ebooks, Hosting, Or any thread which is based on fixed prices. All the buyer has to do is press the contract button and purchase. (No problem here)

Scenario 2 where 100% of contracts are not started through a button:
Usually when a thread is about Coding, Exchanging, Writing, or any thread which is not based on fixed prices. In that case, it's hard to guarantee if the seller/buyer are gonna use the contract button or start a contract directly through the profile. (This is where the error is likely to occur by seller/buyer.)


Here are two possible solutions for this:

1- Allowing members to add a link to the contract during or after it's completed (Which was an original idea of this thread) but as Eagle 95 mentioned above that members will abuse this feature so what can be done in that case is to set time limit, it can be 24 hours or 2 hours (Allowing contract starter to add a link to the original thread of contract). This will ensure that it's not abused. (If still anyone is caught up abusing this feature (Which is unlikely to happy) in that case they should receive a strict punishment.

2- This solution is more focused on avoiding the error in the early stage of the contract:

We can bring the focus of users on Thread link by adding a red warning sign, something like this:


And another possible solution is that if the start contract button is pressed without any thread link (There can be a pop up confirming user if they want to continue without adding a thread link)

[Charger]

I don’t think you understand a contract. A contract is terms 2 or more parties agree on. If you add the ability to modify an accepted contract then you no lontgwr have a contract.

If you had a contract to buy a house from the bank, would you want them to change anything on the contract after you accepted it?

You’re trying to fix an issue that doesn’t exist and if it did, can instantly be solved by using that thing between your ears and above your neck called your brain. Did you and the dude that suggested 3D avatars fall from the same stork and hit every branch on the stupid tree on the way down?


Nachfolger

[KɪɴG]

I don’t think you understand a contract. A contract is terms 2 or more parties agree on. If you add the ability to modify an accepted contract then you no lontgwr have a contract.

If you had a contract to buy a house from the bank, would you want them to change anything on the contract after you accepted it?

You’re trying to fix an issue that doesn’t exist and if it did, can instantly be solved by using that thing between your ears and above your neck called your brain. Did you and the dude that suggested 3D avatars fall from the same stork and hit every branch on the stupid tree on the way down?


Nachfolger

This suggestion is not about modifying the original contract terms, it's more focused on thread links only. Please read my above post to understand what I'm here talking about. Don't assume things without reading the whole thing.

Suggestions and Ideas section is about giving your suggestions to improve the forum, If you don't agree with my suggestion, you can leave my thread and move on.  I'm not here to get the idea 100% implemented, I suggested what I thought could improve the contract system and If staff finds it interesting, they can implement it, otherwise, they can ignore my suggestion. That's how any system is improved.

You have the full right to disagree with someone's opinion, but no right to insult them. I have no idea which guy you're talking about and neither my suggestion is related to avatars.

[Nachfolger]

You have the full right to disagree with someone's opinion, but no right to insult them. [...]

And that's where you're wrong, kiddo. If you're going to get butthurt over people trashing on your posts, then don't make them.

I have to agree with the notion of you misunderstanding a contract. Once it's finalized, there is zero reason to modify any of it's properties. Cancel the contract and create one with the URL.

Isn't there a minimum IQ to be vendor, Charger ? I suppose not. Maybe I'll qualify.

[KɪɴG]

And that's where you're wrong, kiddo. If you're going to get butthurt over people trashing on your posts, then don't make them.

I have to agree with the notion of you misunderstanding a contract. Once it's finalized, there is zero reason to modify any of it's properties. Cancel the contract and create one with the URL.

Isn't there a minimum IQ to be vendor, Charger ? I suppose not. Maybe I'll qualify.

Update: Please read my 2nd post on this thread before saying anything.