Disputes: Everybody Loses

[LancerForHire]

Those that have had the misfortune of being involved in a project dispute know that everybody loses. Let us look at an example:

Originally Posted by Example A

Bob (programmer) and Joe (buyer) begin working on a project using escrow, due in two days.

--- The work is completed 1 day early. ---

Bob sends the completed work to Joe. Joe approves of it, and is happy the work is completed early, but would like extra work done at no additional charge.

Bob respectfully declines the request, stating more funds must be place in .

Joe threatens to give bad feedback, cancel project, etc.

Bob opens a dispute to be reviewed by Scriptlance staff to get his hard earned money.

Scriptlance staff, after looking more into the matter, intervenes and releases the escrow to Bob.

--- One day later. ---

Vengefully, Joe submits a 1/10 review filled to the brim with lies for Bob.

Bob receives a review notice stating he must also submit one for Joe within 7 days, or lose the ability to exchange it.

Bob opens a help desk ticket asking to remove the Joe's ability to review him for the project.

--- Three to five days later. ---

Scriptlance staff replies, and removes the ability to review for the project (both ways).

How does everyone lose?
1. Bob lost time in an attempt to protect his reputation from a scam artist buyer.
2. Joe pays up like he was supposed to for the work that was initially agreed upon, much to his discontent.
3. The next programmer that Joe works with might not have a backbone, or has too much to lose, and ends up getting taken for a ride.

How do we fix this? Simple: Scriptlance staff should automatically remove reviewing power for the losing parties of project disputes, but retain the reviewing power for the winning party. This should also be flexible for disputes with differing circumstances (such as only the losing party being able to review, or both parties exchanging as normal).

With the proposed solution, #1 will never happen, #2 will always happen, and #3 will be prevented (due to the review from the previous programmer).

Thanks for reading.