From: Andreas K. Foerster > Well, to me this "inactive" still sounds too much like "invalid".
(and now comes the real, neverending differences over semantics ;-) > So how about a change in the labeling? > How about a "recertification recommended" status, > or "current" versus "not current", or "dated", or something > like that? I'm sure others will disagree there too, saying they are worse and make other suggestions. But maybe - JUST MAYBE - it's because LPI is more "in-sync" with peer-professional/licensing organizations/agencies, but "INACTIVE" merely and often means you didn't renew, did not meet continuing requirements, etc... for "ACTIVE" status. So at this point, I think everyone should trust LPI's judgement on the semantics. ;-) Although I'm sure that just some of the arrogant engineer coming out in me, causing me to roll my eyes at the technicians that aren't familar with many professional regulatory agencies/boards. ;-) I mean, unlike nearly all other certification programs, LPI even has the program setup for "PROBATION" and other "disciplinary" actions. I mean, other vendors and programs are too busy with marketing and would just kick you out if you went against their wishes. LPI is trying to build a program _respected_ by not only peer Linux professionals, but established, professional and regulatory organizations and agencies in general. ;-) -- Sent from my Treo _______________________________________________ lpi-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss
