Its in line with my thought too. Maybe the title can be something like LPIC-2(2006) Really am looking forward to the certificate being in its original sense of not being invalidated. Currently it looks like some pressure is being made by external forces to have LPI fall into other certification requirements/methods. Nicholas
Frank Vincentelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Just a thought - would it make sense to attach the year to the certification? As in LPIC-2-2006. That would avoid labels and having to manage them. It would remove the issue of changing the original commitment to non-invalidation. It would also give prospective employers useful information: a 5-year old (but otherwise active/valid/pick your term) cert with a healthy show of experience in the field can be just as strong (or stronger) as a more recent cert; on the other hand, the same 5-year old cert with no supporting experience would certainly not carry the same implication of current proficiency. After all, do you go back to college every couple of years to graduate again? Frank __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ lpi-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss
