[clug] [OT] Ugly vicious swine Web developers

[Scott Ferguson]

 On 17/08/10 11:20, David Tulloh wrote:
> Scott Ferguson wrote:
>>  Good morning shiny, happy CLUGers :-)
>>
>> Not entirely Off Topic as it involves Linux as a back-end, Joomla! and
>> Open licensed scripts...
>>
>> Can anyone suggest a means of warning potential victims of unscrupulous
>> Web Site Designers/Developers?
>>   
> ...
>> When they hired this company (I'll call them the Cartel 'cause it's part
>> of their business name) they asked me to look at the initial website and
>> tell them "what I think" (as a favour).
> [snipped]
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> Step 1.  Name the company when you write nicely worded rants against
> them, if the principles are dodgy then name them too.  Then when the
> next potential client does an internet search on the company they will
> find your warning and go elsewhere, the more people who they rip off
> the more warnings that get out there.
>

I basically did name the company. I'm treading a fine line between
breaching the clients request to keep their poor judgement private and a
social obligation.
I could post the full name of the company - but the less web savvy
clients would just wind up looking at an American award-winning
designers site.
A google search with the info I provided will put the offenders at the
top of the search results.

Publishing the name of the principal would mostly lead to people being
confused with a prominent and reputable West Australian businessman.
These swine appear to be well practiced at creating confusion. They also
refuse to be embarrassed.

>
> Your assurance that the client owns the site may not be correct, they
> should get a lawyer to review the contract.

I did - the scumbag's assertion that the developed the CMS is false
(Joomla!) as is their claim to have developed the scripting (mostly
pinched from freeflow.org) - all the images and text were provided by
the client. There are other aspects of the business relationship I
didn't (and won't/can't mention). :-/

> If the contractor created the site then my understanding is that by
> default they own the copyright to the work.  I believe it's
> complicated by the nature of the contract (work for hire is different)
> but it's not simple and if it's not specifically addressed in the
> contract they should get advice on it.
>
> Hiring contractors is always a bit hit and miss, I'm consistently
> surprised and honoured by the trust people who employ me for contracts
> have.  A 12 page (mostly) static site is fairly simple and personally
> I'd be looking for a talented kid just out of highschool.  

I usually insist on clients reviewing and approving changes before they
are implemented, always providing them with passwords etc. And yes -
they normally are very trusting - yet if they were being asked to spend
the same money on a vehicle they'd insist on a mechanic of their choice
checking it first. Something to do with sufficiently advanced technology
being indistinguishable from magic?
For their requirements I believe you are correct. I'd happily give them
a half hour guide to Wordpress and let them do it themselves.

> Or you can go with a large professional group and get a very expensive
> guarantee, depends on your risk profile I suppose.
>
>
>
> David
>
>

Thanks David - I'm hoping to get the clients to look at this thread....

To the others who have posted responses (Steve, Grant) - thanks also,
I'm reading them - but it may take some time for me to be able to respond