Our anti-spam stuff bounced this message saying that Tom is not a list member - I'll follow up with him, but in the meantime here is his message. Dan From: Tom McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Kenneth J. Lund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alan & Susan Mead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Revised: A Proposed Concensus for Recertification and Renewal Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 11:37:16 -0500 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.24] Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Jared Buckley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Mon, 06 Sep 1999, Kenneth J. Lund wrote: > >%_> Does this mean we will ignore (keep no record of) tests failed? I think > > that's a good idea but I wanted to make sure I wasn't assuming. BTW, what's > > our policy on retesting? > > > > What does EXPIRE mean? If we will not require certificate holders to > > renew or recertify then I think it must mean marked as expired but > > otherwise unchanged and retreivable by a background checker who visits the > > LPI site . I would agree to that (I would use a different word than > > expire like recommend recertification ). I take it that this > > expiration would happen only after (at least) 2 years since the person > > passed an exam? I think the complaints by Forrest and Kenneth are based in > > part on misreadings of this so please clarify. > > > > I don't think I misread it. I have certifications for IRIX administration and > other "UNIX" systems and they do not "expire" , "recommend recertification" or > any other words you wish to use. If you want this to be a "trade" go ahead and > treat it as such, I will not be involved and I think many more will not, but if > you want to treat it as a profession then once an individual has the > certification that's it. I don't think you want a program like CPR do you? That > requires recertification to prove competence. Is that what you are after with > this certification? Or are you demonstrating that an individual has mastered a > subject? Those are both two very different certification approaches, what are > you after? You can make the testing as tough as you want, I have no problem > with that, but requiring recertification every two years or so just cheapens the > whole process. > > Enough said, you have my 2 cents, I will not bother to bring it up again. I'll > just wait and see what happens.... > > > -- > /> > /< Ken Lund (Goomba) > |o[\\\\\|(O):::<======================================- > \< > \> > > > I have been following this from the begining but haven't said much, however it looks like it is nearing the end of the process so I guess it is time to speak. I agree 100% with Ken Lund. If this is a license, I want no part of it. If it is a certification, then I will get my certification and be on my way. ---- Tom McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There is always one more imbecile than you counted on! ________________________________________________________________________ This message was sent by the linux-cert-program mailing list. To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe | mail -s '' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
