Sir Walker

Not a customer, but a complete headache. According to the task, it was required to make authorization through social networks. For example, the customer gave the site https://dominos.ua/ and said to do it the way it was, while the customer did not specify any details and details. To implement the task, I decided to use the uLogin.ru widget, which allows you to solve this problem quickly and efficiently. I started work on the 10th, at the same time asking to deposit money in the safe. The customer deposited money only on the 15th. It is clear that this period of time I paid insufficient attention to the project. After depositing the money in the safe, I took up the project more closely. I also note that the quality of the program code on the project leaves much to be desired, widespread duplication of code, no documentation, far from the best solutions. Because of this, I made a bug due to which authorization through the social network did not work, it turned out that I did not meet the deadline. The customer immediately tried to close the project and wrote a bad review, after a little conversation, the project decided to continue. I found a bug, fixed it, the authorization worked. I showed it to the customer. The customer immediately made a remark that he did not like that I was using the uLogin widget, to which I replied that this decision was announced to him at the correspondence stage, the customer said that he did not agree to this decision, but I answered him that he agreed with my decision when he chose me as a performer. After that, the customer made remarks of a completely absurd nature, like "I want the authorization to work in a new window and not in the current tab." The customer again closed the project with a negative review. I filed for arbitration, described the situation, the customer also made retaliatory accusations, made another remark of a strange nature, said that he did not ask to register through social networks and asked to remove the buttons, the decision in terms of UX to put it mildly, strange, well, the master removed it, after another next claim against me, the customer said that after authorization, some kind of garbage shows an empty user profile, to which I replied that I had done everything as part of the standard implementation of authorization on his website , where the user, after authorization, gets to the profile page. There was no clear technical specification, the customer changes the conditions on the fly.The arbitrator decided that all the customer’s comments had a place to be and decided the dispute in his favour, which is mildly speaking strange.The facts that the main task was done, the customer did not do a clear technical task,with the money in the seafood until a week later could be said ignored.For the effort and time spent I did not get any cash.I summarize:
The customer does not provide a clear TZ
has a low level of speed.
It delays money.
Not able to make a compromise.
Trying to make the artist a vacation cow.
He perceives criticism to his address and to his project as a personal harassment.I do not advise anyone to work with him.

Good day
I had one request to prepare their site for the EXTRUCTION of goods as it was placed in the TZ.
In the technical task was not provided for the preparation of CATEGORY, PRODUCTORY and OPTIONS of PRODUCTS to the loading and this was to be performed by the customer before the loading.
Categories and manufacturers he prepared and by groups of options no.
When loading the script did not find the option and completed the work with a mistake.