> From: James Linden Rose, III > Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 5:49 PM > Subject: Re: [Boston.pm] (also) Perl > > From: "James Linden Rose, III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:42:06 PM US/Eastern > To: Adam Turoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [Boston.pm] (also) Perl > > On Monday, February 28, 2005, at 12:46 PM, Adam Turoff wrote: > > Another "worst case for certification" is that the community bifurcates > > from those who are rabidly anti-certification, and they take their > > efforts and talents elsewhere. And their patches. And stop > > maintaining their modules. > > I don't believe in this perspective. Why would anyone be "rabidly > anti-certification"? That seems terribly irrational. I would call > such a person a certifiphobe to his face. How does one person's > certification offend some other person who doesn't believe in it? Take > their talents where? Where are they fleeing to? Fleeing from what? > The train of logic seems to have episodes of being aeronautical. I > understand that some may think certification is a waist of time, but > how does that offend or discourage that person from upgrading their > module?
I am anti-certification. Why? To put it extremely bluntly: certifications are socialist. People who believe in certifications have the same na�f mentality as people who believe in socialism. In theory, certifications would be granted to people upon their demonstration that they understood the material covered by the certification. And, in theory, a high school diploma indicates that a person is able to read and write. In reality, certifications would be given to people who paid for them, regardless of what they know. The hiring practices of companies would require that the certification be held, thus requiring that the job candidates pay whatever fee the certifying authority wishes to charge. For a small bribe, the person administering the test would provide the candidate with the answers. With the certification being the key to better employment, the bribe would be a small price for the candidate to pay. Deciding not to hire a person who holds certifications becomes hard to justify. Firing a person for incompetence would become even more problematic, as their holding of a certification would be considered proof of their competence. The job market moves, to a small or large degree, towards a static pool of incompetent criminals who cannot be fired and cannot contribute. What problem are you trying to solve? By what theory? With what experience? -- John Redford _______________________________________________ Boston-pm mailing list [email protected] http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
