On Jun 21, 2006, at 8:28 PM, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
On Wed, 2006-06-21 at 16:40 -0700, Evan Blomquist wrote:
Agreed, but I don't know what accepting jobs has to do with
certification.
Then why did you make this statement on this list?
"If you can pass level 2 and you still don't have a job,
your problem is probably more of a personality disorder
than a skill deficit."
Now if you were answering what someone else said, just remember I
never
discussed jobs.
Yeah, but it's damned funny as statements go, and I think Evan and I
have seen ample evidence in our careers that people can pursue certs
til they pop but if you can't get a job after the first major one,
it's not going to help you to get further ones, it's something else
that's affecting the issue.
The only time I've mentioned anything is that I have professional
expectations of what I believe enterprise Linux administrators should
know, but never have I made it about their employment or credentials.
I've always made it about what I believe the program should be testing
and representing.
I think the JTA and initial objective writing will show what is and
isn't practiced in industry.
And if the JTA says that people aren't really that interested in
practicing the Word According to Bryan's View of Enterprise Sysadmin,
what then? I used to scoff at GUI apps and tools, but then I have to
pay much closer attention to them, that's what the majority of my
attendees and my compatriots were raised using, so I have had to
change my position to fit the situation. Same thing for newspapers,
I never thought I'd enjoy a USA Today, and I still don't, but it's
much more useful to me at this stage of life than the WSJ or NYT is,
too damned much blather and text.
At the same time, I'm full warning everyone that I've regularly
been in
the 10% minority on various issues and recommendations when it
comes to
enterprise Linux. But it doesn't mean I'm any less correct. I don't
discredit anyone else's experience, but when it comes to LPIC-3, I
believe we're talking enterprise Linux -- and that's more than just
setting up basic, standalone or departmental services.
Ok, so I am going to mention ONE MORE TIME why I have been going on
about the whole Hands On and scenario-based exam model: It's damned
hard to make questions-based exams that are effective in a complex
enterprise-wide environment without having more than just a single
exam question on a screen. Your very argument about the need for a
exams and objectives that are befitting to an enterprise level
environment point to something else than a question/answer exam. I
could write a scenario that would test someone very well on a task in
a few minutes time, but my mind boggles at writing a single question
with a single answer that would adequately or in sets of 4 or 5 test
that scenario, particularly at the level we're talking about and you
suggest.
Oh crap, I went and did it again, perhaps a different thread is
needed, or maybe a whole different list for this argument...
All I ask is everyone recognize where I'm coming from. I really
want to
ensure we have more enterprise Linux expertise out there than what
I've
regularly been running into with peer Linux sysadmins and other
consultants on matters that require them to "think outside the
box" (i.e., outside a single service). If this ends up not being the
consensus, I will respect the wishes of the group, but I'm sure I'm
already in the minority on it.
Right, and I don't think this is the particular venue to try to force
the whole industry to follow along with what might indeed be right,
but is patently not happening the way you or I or many others wish
it would. Matt and Taki have mentioned this will be in a particular
format and I don't think it's going to change, we're doing a Samba
exam in a particular way, and I don't see the overall exam objectives
being changed that much. I really do see this ancient commitment to
LPIJ as being some sort of albatross around the neck of the exam
developers.
Why? Because you've contributed the most to the list I was just
(hopefully) adding a little comic relief. Since we've never met, I
have
to envision the stereotypical BOFH, jacked up on Red Bull and
Twinkies,
all hell-bent to set the world straight on just about any matter.
It's
nothing personal, just some fun with your _intense_ writing style.
Yes, in e-mail, I'm blunt, opinionated and abrasive. But I do a
lot of
consulting, training and writing for a living -- it doesn't match my
e-mail at all. In fact, I avoid e-mail when I'm on a site (walking
over
to their desk is much better) or even when working with a client
remotely (phone is still far better).
Bryan (Mr. Smith if you prefer),
The name Bryan and the surname Smith are too common.
Just call me by my initials (yes, I have a lot of pride and ego ;-).
I have come to truly respect your knowledge,
Blah! We all have our areas and expertise.
E.g., I'm _not_ a web developer. In fact, I avoid it for various
reasons (margins too thin). So I wouldn't even think of telling
someone
how to approach any Apache or other Internet services exam. Written
some client/server stuff in C, Java (largely because it's the only way
to interface with PeopleSoft, etc...), but I'm not a webapp guru in
the
least bit.
Now I've had a lot of experience integrating enterprise services
across
multiple sites and subnets of some very, very, very large
organizations.
And most of those concepts still apply even to 50-100 user
organizations
with only 2-3 subnets and only 2-3 platforms. Heck, there's a lot of
good stuff on filesystems and Linux server to server communication
that
I believe is crucial to other things.
And I know a majority of people disagree with me. That's fine. I'm
used to it. All I ask is that people don't think I think the
"world is
wrong" because I know others, even if a minority, agree with me.
Hell, I agree with you more than not, I think Evan is backpedalling a
little, which he shouldn't do, his contribution can be as effective
as yours, I've worked with the Fish (Evan) a lot and if you can get
him to contribute often, it's good stuff. Give him hell on a regular
basis, Evan, Bryan is able to shake it off and keep going, and he's a
good egg. Never seen anyone else on this list who can take it and
dish it in full measure, and when he REALLY gets going, email replies
happen in 3's. You watch, happens all the time...
So when I make a comment about your head exploding, note that it is
made in fraternal jest
I know. I just wanted to let you know I don't get upset in the least
bit about anything.
He really doesn't. Amazingly enough. He's absorbed some of my best
and kept on going... Always expected to meet him at a show and be
dodging bullets.
I have a common expression that "I take a keyboard
to blah" which means I'm just jesting I want to use "aggregated
osmosis"
to bring someone up to speed on something when they don't see the
value
in knowing it. ;->
-- just picture me smashing an empty Budweiser (Molson for you
Canadians) can into my empty head and passing out.
I don't drink, although people have suggested I should start as I
might
be more mellow. Actually, if you meet me in person, I'm pretty
mellow.
Yep and very much the gentleman and conversationalist, we had lunch
and hung about a few hours at LW Boston and Bryan is like the Email
Walter Mitty, the big Red S on his shirt is for Sendmail... I can't
imagine a list without BJ, er BS, um, Bryan.
Ross
_______________________________________________
lpi-examdev mailing list
[email protected]
http://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
