Miguel Martinez
My feedback
1 result found
-
31 votes
Makes perfect sense, thanks for posting it here! Leaving it open for others to vote and comment on.
Best,
JonAn error occurred while saving the comment Miguel Martinez supported this idea ·
I have an "pool" user which is in charge of pay all expenses from my roommates and sometime there are personal expenses payed by the pool user. The Split by adjustment is the way to do the splitting but because the pool user is included, at the end the split does not make sense.
pool user pays 20 -> split by adjustment -> user 1 +0, user 2 +2, pool user +0 <in this case I want to exclude the pool user from the splitting>