What is the interest of the owner of the NetBout service? about netbout HOT 32 CLOSED

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 16-Sep-2010 11:26am

Totally agree with the defect. Profit of the netbout.com has to be emphasized in the SRS. It has to be calculated as percentage of everything paid to ActorHelper-s. 25% of everything goes to netbout.com.

The SRS has to be corrected.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 16-Sep-2010 11:27am

Looks like we have to introduce another actor - ActorManager, who is a representative of netbout.com and who manages things like these commissions, payouts, etc.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 16-Sep-2010 11:28am

Marko, the ticket is for you. You see the problem explained, now you have to make corrections to the current version of SRS, and Yuri (author of the ticket) will confirm them, when done. I will close the ticket afterwards. The budget for the ticket is set already. If you don't agree, please correct. Otherwise, go ahead.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by marko_lipo on 16-Sep-2010 12:23pm

I think I'll need 1 hour for this. For clarifications and explanations, do I ask you or Yuri?

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 16-Sep-2010 3:41pm

Ok, agree. Normally 0.5hours should be enough for one ticket related to SRS, but for start I agree on 1 hour.

I'm a requirements provider'' for this project, so you ask me. Yuri is a ''reviewer of the SRS, and he wants to understand requirements. He failed to understand some of them and submitted this ticket. You clarify requirements with me and ask him to understand them again. If he understands, the ticket is closed. That's the workflow :)

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by marko_lipo on 19-Sep-2010 2:38pm

Please clarify and confirm:
Plan is following: we develop NetBout and launch it on the web, and potential owners pay us fee for using it, right?
Then each owner configures NetBout for his purposes, puts ActorHelpers that he wishes to hire etc.
Or you are the owner?
I'm a bit confused - who is who in the story and who pays fees for using service? Please explain, I'm a bit stupid today, did I connected something wrong?

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 19-Sep-2010 4:08pm

I've added a small user story to [wiki:SRS@11], please review. Keep in mind, that some helpers may be provided by netbout.com (mostly free), and others will be provided by other companies. These companies (they are called ActorHelper in the SRS) will want to charge money from netbout users for the usage of helpers.

In general, netbout.com is a free instrument for online communication, for everybody. It's a replacement of email, for many cases.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by marko_lipo on 19-Sep-2010 10:48pm

OK thanx for the story. Now it's much clearer, so to conclude:

1. there is one provider of NetBout.com (the owner).
2. Owner enables helpers that could be used by users.
3. User is able to CRUDL bouts, and can choose between available helpers if he wants to add certain feature to the bout (calendar, video etc).
4. user pays to the helper fee defined by helper, and additional fee to the owner of the NetBout; both fees should be clearly communicated to the user before it activates helper.
5. if user users NetBout just for conversation, then it is free, and no fee is paid to the owner.

Am I right?

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 20-Sep-2010 6:07am

Absolutely!

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by marko_lipo on 23-Sep-2010 9:18pm

I'm thinking of creating new entity called OwnersCharge or like, to be described as "fee calculated as percentage of turnover from using ActorHelper stage".
Fee is calculated automatically by SUD periodically.
I'm thinking of new usecase: where ActorManager (the admin) reviews OwnersCharge (the profit).
In it I would describe how admin checks and approves payments...
What do you think of this idea?

PS there are some troubles with Trac today, I'm trying whole hour to access tickets, geting Error 500 several times

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 26-Sep-2010 3:20pm

I think that idea is good, but show a bit more detailed implementation. How will it look in text?

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by marko_lipo on 27-Sep-2010 10:00pm

I would say following:

ActorManager is a ActorUser.

ActorManager is an „owner and administrator of the NetBout web site, in
charge of administering users, statistics, managing payment orders
 between ActorUser(s) and ActorHelper(s), and charging ActorUser(s) for
using chargeable features of the NetBout“.

OwnersCharge is a:"owner's fee calculated as percentage of turnover from using helper's stage-s".

UC19 where ActorManager (the admin) reviews payment-s:
 1. admin lists users.
UC19 1a) If balance of the user is positive:
 1. admin registers payment to the user
UC20 1b) If balance of the user is negative:
 1. Failure "payment cannot be registered".
 2. admin reads balance of himself.
 UC19 2a) If balance of admin is positive:
 1. SUD calculates OwnersCharge (the profit).
 2. admin registers the profit.
 UC19 2b) If balance of admin is negative:
 1. Failure "error in processing".

Please check if sth is missing.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 29-Sep-2010 2:05pm

There are a few critical mistakes, I have to correct. First, we can't define functionality of ActorManager inside its definition. When you're saying:

ActorManager is an "..., in charge of … something"

And then later you define this something the information is duplicated. What if later we decide to let manage payment orders to another actor, say ActorAccountant? We will have a conflict between functionality explained in is a statement and use cases of another actor.

Second problem is that you mixed up mail flow and alternative flow. They should follow each other, not mix up. See the example at [http://www.rqdql.com/rqdql.html].

Would be nice if you try again, fix the mistakes, and I review again.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by marko_lipo on 29-Sep-2010 10:25pm

Sorry, total mess, I had some multiple problems with saving the page so I inserted by mistake all my mock up notes from previous drafts...

I mean:

ActorManager is a ActorUser.

ActorManager is an „owner and administrator of the NetBout web site".

OwnersCharge is a:"owner's fee calculated as percentage of turnover from using helper's stage-s".

UC19 where ActorManager (the admin) reviews payment-s:
 1. The admin lists users.
 2. The admin reads balance of the user.
 3. The admin registers payment to the user.
UC19 3a) If balance of the user is negative:
 1. Failure "payment cannot be registered".


UC21 where ActorManager (the admin)reviews OwnersCharge (the profit):
 1. The admin reads balance of himself.
 2. SUD calculates OwnersCharge (the profit).
 3. The admin registers the profit.
UC21 3a) If balance of admin is negative:
 1. Failure "error in processing".

In addition I would some additional use cases for admin, like: where the admin administers users etc if necessary...

What do you say?

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 4-Oct-2010 12:11pm

I like UC19 from the example above - without any corrections.

But I still don't think that we need a special type for OwnersCharge. And I don't see why admin has to register the profit. The profit has to be calculated automatically. And there is no necessity to do anything with it manually. It just appears in the bank account of ActorManager, that's it. Nothing to do here, manually. Maybe I missed something?

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by marko_lipo on 4-Oct-2010 11:54pm

OK for UC19. I tried to insert UC19 and ActorManager in SRS but, apparently I missed some semantics or there is some error and now cannot get it. I keep receiving message:

Genshi UnicodeDecodeError error while rendering template (unknown template location)

What is it?

Regarding OwnersProfit comment, I see that since ActorManager is ActorUser, it should be enough to add in ActorManager properties:

ActorManager includes:

 * profit: "difference between payments received from users and payments made to the helpers";

And then add in UC19:

4. The admin reads profit of himself.

What do you say?

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by marko_lipo on 5-Oct-2010 9:10pm

Please check, I inserted UC19 but i couldn't make it in scope, there were always some warning messages that I cannot figure out reason. Therefore I inserted it quoted.
Please clarify.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 11-Oct-2010 8:08pm

UC19 looks fine for me. Try to make it un-quoted.

ActorManager error appears because you added some UTF-8 symbols to the page content. It's a defect in Trac configuration. I will fix it tomorrow.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 24-Oct-2010 4:47pm

The problem with UTF-8 in Trac is fixed. Try again please.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by marko_lipo on 27-Oct-2010 4:50pm

Thanks it is fixed now.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 12-Nov-2010 2:25pm

Yuri, could you please confirm that the ticket is closed?

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 21-Feb-2011 7:32am

Any news here? Please update. If we have no answer in the next 7 days I will have to assign the ticket to someone else.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by y.vedenin on 22-Feb-2011 11:56am

I'll update the ticket till Wednesday, February 23, 2011

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by y.vedenin on 24-Feb-2011 10:43pm

Sorry, but I didn't find how to calculate the sum of profit of the NetBout service owner. For example, I rented an ActorHelper and paid 100 USD for it. How can I calculate the sum the owner of the NetBout service gets? I think that the System should be able to calculate this and represent in some kind of report to the owner.

Please, let me know what do you think.
Probably I've missed something in SRS.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 25-Feb-2011 7:27am

Marko, take a look. I think that Yuri is right, we failed to answer the main question in this ticket. Looks like it has to be answered in UC9... What do you think?

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by marko_lipo on 28-Feb-2011 10:20pm

I would suggest that we revert to my earlier proposal [http://trac.fazend.com/netbout/ticket/22#comment:14] about OwnersCharge and proposed Uc21. Please review.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 2-Mar-2011 5:11pm

Let's do something more simple for now. Let's just add a new slot to ActorManager, and call it "profit". There we will informally explain how it is calculated. That will be enough, I'm sure. UC21 looks interesting, but it's very simple for now. We can avoid it.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by marko_lipo on 2-Mar-2011 8:22pm

OK, updated [wiki:ActorManager@3]. However it seems that more details about how admin manages fee percentage should be inserted in UC21 or UC14. What do you say?

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 7-Mar-2011 5:48pm

Well, for me everything is clear now. We know how to calculate the profit. How exactly (technically) it will be calculated is out of scope of SRS and belongs to technical domain. I think that we're done here.

Yuri, what do you think?

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by y.vedenin on 14-Mar-2011 11:14pm

From my point of view the ticket is completed now.
Thank you.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 16-Mar-2011 5:50pm

Thanks all, the ticket is closed.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 23-Nov-2011 9:06am

Milestone JUN11 deleted

from netbout.