Question to european gnucash users

[Fredrik Persson]

> >What's the point of having checks, really?? They just seem to make everything 
> >more complicated and difficult.
> >
<marther presents a lot of good reasons to use cheques> 

Yes, I know. We've *got* cheques in Europe too. I've used one once, for the down payment on a car.

However, that's not really the point. The commonwealth (is America + New Zeeland and Australia?) uses cheques a *lot* compared to europe. I don't know why. Maybe you get robbed so often in the US that cash is useless? But, as I said, that's not really the point.

> I like electronic transactions as much as the next guy, and I have moved 
> to them as much as possible.  But some people still give cheques (a 
> customer of mine usually pays me that way as he has no internet access 
> and lives 2 hours from his nearest bank), and expect to receive them (my 
> landlord), so although cheques have shrunk to a small percentage of the 
> transactions, everybody around here (Canada) still has to be prepared to 
> accept them and provide them.

Does Canada use less cheques than the US?

> Just because you don't use cheques doesn't mean nobody should use them, 
> and doesn't mean (as others have elaborated on) that reconciling is 
> pointless or that the feature should be removed (which is what your 
> comments seemed to be driving at).

Not at all, although I understand why you think so.

This is what I mean: when I started using gnucash, I had to translate all of the *concepts* that involved cheques into concepts that didn't. Try reading the manual and the help pages while pretending that you *never* use cheques, and you'll see what I mean. It's not very easy, especially if you don't have any previous experience in accounting. (Which I think should be taken into account since a lot of the first time users of gnucash are people who just want to get some structure in their home economy.)

I had put this issue behind me, but when I got my first statement since I started using gnucash I thought "hey, let's try that reconciliation thingy" and it all came back to me.

Isn't there some kind of translation project that aims at translating gnucash, including the documentation, into other languages? I'll tell you this; if all this talk about cheques is still there when the swedish version is finished, people in this country will get veeery confused! And this is not very good for gnucash in the end.

So, it's all about the concepts! Europe needs a version of gnucash that doesn't evolve around the use of cheques. That's the point, really. 

>  You still can use reconciling to 
> check your cheque-less transactions and ensure that the amount you 
> intended to tip at the restaurant by Visa ('n' in the R column), matches 
> what shows up in your running balance on Visa's site (which may take a 
> few days to get posted depending on the vendor) ('c' in the R column), 
> and is really how much they took according to your monthly (online or 
> paper) statement ('y' in the R column).

Yes, this is in essence what you can do. But to first make sure that gnucash and the VISA card online service matches, and THEN make sure that gnucash matches the statement, is a little bit too much work. How many on this list have had the online VISA transactions mismatch the paper statement? It makes a lot more sense in a cheque-country.

> Yes, Canadians (and I suppose the rest of the Commonwealth) spell it 
> that way.

I knew there was something wrong with the way I spelled it, I just couldn't figure out what it was! Thanks!

/Fredrik Persson