G. Matthew Rice wrote: > Then, some well intentioned people convinced others to add those titles > that you mention. This caused a lot of confusion (and acrimony) since the > certs are useful and targeted to more job roles than just admins and > "engineers" (whatever those are ;)).
There are many places where you don't get to call yourself an “engineer” unless you are properly licensed as one (like, civil engineer, electrical engineer, etc.) and are a member of good standing of the relevant professional body. “Linux Engineers”, even with a certificate from the LPI, are not proper engineers in such places, and trying to pass yourself off as one may have Dire Consequences. This applies to other titles that IT professionals might want to use, too. Many years ago some distant colleagues got into trouble for calling their company “Architects of VoIP”, when here in Germany, architects are people who design physical buildings and oversee their construction. The real architects are *very* protective of their turf – to a point where their professional body will come down like the proverbial ton of bricks on anyone who has the temerity to style themselves, e.g., a “software architect” on their business card and does not happen to have appropriate building-architect credentials to back that up. So, those “Architects of VoIP” quickly had to get new letterheads printed. Anselm -- Anselm Lingnau · [email protected] · https://www.tuxcademy.org Freie Schulungsmaterialien für Linux und Open-Source-Software Free Training Materials for Linux and Open-Source Software _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] https://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
