vWorker Rent A Code , vworker Did not follow there own rules of arbitration, made up rules as they went, acted inconsistantly and unproffessional none, Internet

I wanted to make sure there wasn’t a problem we needed to correct with our arbitration process, so I did some research and was able to find your arbitration.

I believe this is Jeremy Collins, referring to the following project: https://www.vworker.com/RentACoder/misc/BidRequests/ShowBidRequest.asp?lngBidRequestId=1720897#Ratings.

During arbitration, you are asked to only post facts. This means that you should not post any opinions or insults about the other party, which includes what you think about the other party, what you think they were doing, what you think they intended, etc. You should only respond with information that can be verified through the onsite documentation.

As an example: if you are asked if the other party has been communicating completely onsite, your arbitrator is asking for facts in return. So you should respond with “yes” or “no” and provide details related to the facts (if pertinent). You should NOT tell your arbitrator that you think (as an example) that other party is a cheat, incompetent, a deliberate liar, is wasting time, etc. That is the difference between facts (which are verifiable) and opinions (which are either subjective or your guesses as to what the other party is thinking).

As you have stated, you were forfeited from the arbitration for alleging the employer had made a false statement, after you were requested not to do so. Alleging that the employer has made a false statement is considered an opinion since it includes what you think the other party has done. The other party may have posted inconsistent information (which can be verified), but it doesn’t mean what was posted was untrue/false. The other party may have had a valid reason for posting these inconsistencies, or it may have been a legitimate mistake. As your arbitrator pointed out, the issue was that you phrased this in such a way to insinuate that the other party was lying, which is considered an opinion. If you wanted to have the arbitrator look into the inconsistencies in the employer’s postings, then you should have simply informed the arbitrator that the employer’s responses were inconsistent or contradictory (and refrained from insinuating that the employer was lying).

I see that you were offered a senior arbitration review on this arbitration, but you chose to decline it. It seems you chose to decline the review in fear that your account would be closed. As your arbitrator stated, your account is only closed if you request a senior review, and the arbitrator does not find a legitimate reason for you to have requested the review (i.e. you did so simply to unfairly delay the arbitration and spite the other party and waste time). Your account is not closed if you request a review and win, or if you lose and have a valid reason for requesting the review.

If this rule was not in place, then every person who deserved to lose but did not agree with their rating would request an arbitration review. The rule filters out those people, while allowing legitimate reviews to take place.

Now, you mentioned that if your account is closed, vWorker would be able to keep your earnings. Please note that even if your account is closed, you would still be eligible to receive payment for any funds earned from other projects. Your contract states that you will forfeit funds in your account if the funds came from a fraudulent transaction, or if you abandon your account (and do not collect payment). Nowhere in the arbitration did the arbitrator mention that you would forfeit funds earned from other projects.

You also mentioned that vWorker allowed your code to be downloaded by the employer even after you lost the arbitration. Once it was determined that you lost the arbitration, your employer was asked to destroy all copies of all deliverables (that they did not pay for) produced by you (the worker) on the project. The employer posted back a confirmation that the had done this, and confirmed that if they were found in violation of this, they would be subject to fines, imprisonment, legal action by you (the worker), as well as forfeiture of their account on vWorker. Additionally, at your request, I see that the arbitrator hid the postings that contained your deliverables from the employer, so the employer could not download the deliverables again in the future.

We do not allow employers to use work that they did not pay for. If you find that an employer is violating this policy, please contact us with information to verify this claim, and we will more than happy to investigate the issue.

Finally, you mentioned that vWorker makes up rules as we go. You were notified of these policies several times, including during arbitration and in your Worker Contract (which you agreed to follow when you created your account). If you failed to read through your contract, then that was your choice, but I cannot excuse you for violating a policy simply because you chose to skip reading it.

Do you guys even know what a fact is.

Saying that someone made a false statement is not an opinion, it does not imply that they are lying. It does not imply there intent at all. It simply states that something is false.

If you ask me what 2+3 is and I say 7 and you say "Jeremy that is false" are you implying that I am lying? No your just stating a fact, the statement 2+3=7 is false.

 If you ask me 2x what my first name is and I first say it is Jeremy and the second time I say Tom, and you say "One of those statements is false." then are you are not stating an opinion you are simply stating a fact, both can not be correct as I only have 1 first name, so one must be false. Your not implying I lied, your not implying that I made a mistake, your not implying anything, your simply stating the fact that 2 directly contradicting staments can not both be true so one must be false.

This is the same with my arbitration, I did not imply anything, I simply stated that the buyer made 2 statements that contradict so one must be false.

You say I insinuate .. just by sating I insinuate your agreeing that I did not SAY, insinuate is open for interpretation, its akin to a feeling, it in short means what you felt I meant. So you forit me for what you felt I meant. You guessed at my intentions and cost me money based on your guess. So much for an arbitration being about verifiable FACTS, I guess that sticking to the facts does not pertain the vWorker.

I was offered a review but threatened that I would loose my account, the decision as to if I had a good reason to ask for the review would be up to vWorker. Given the fact that you guys use guesses about meaning to not pay workers and that you cant tell the difference between a fact and an opinion also the fact that you dont give in the vWorker agreement any solid definition as to what a good reason is, I chose not to take the risk. Your lack of integrity and your threats bullied me into not asking for a review.

The deliverable were available to the buyer to download for several days after it was decided I lost the arbitration. So for several days vWorker was offering my copyrighted works to the customers (the buyer) without my consent for free.

In the arbitration I clearly asked the arbitrator if she could guarantee that she would not amend or add new rules durring the process. She responded that she could not guarantee this. Also the rule about for fitting your account when asking for a review, actually for fitting your account when doing just about anything, is not in the employer agreement, it is only introduced when the situation comes up, (as in you make rules up as your go, .. as the process goes you add rules), I like how you make a pathetic attempt to belittle me by stating that I didnt read the rules of arbitration or the worker agreement though.

Jeremy,

Your arbitration has been made public at the following link: http://arbitration.vworker.com/2011/12/jeremycollins-forfeits-arbitration-for.html. Please post any additional comments to the arbitration blog so this issue can be discussed transparently and openly.

Thanks for your cooperation.