At 3:52 PM +0000 6/26/03, n rf wrote:
>
>
>
>Look, first of all, I'm obviously not endorsing that anybody with x years of
>experience are automatically handed a ccie number. They would still have to
>pass the test just like anybody else.
>
>Therefore the idea is simple. You use a minimum number of years of
>experience to eliminate the labrats. So instead, you get router-caressers
>(hmmm, sounds like some people enjoy networking a little too much).
I cite that noted networking authority, Leslie Nielsen, in his
autobiography. He describes a screen test in which he was directed
to cross the room and turn on a radio.
Walking to the instrument, he reached out and stroked it softly,
crooning "you're a pretty cute radio."
>You
>then eliminate those guys with the test itself - if that highly experienced
>person didn't actually learn how to do all those things you mentioned, then
>it's unlikely that he would pass the test.
>
>Now obviously, this is imperfect. You will still have some guys who carress
>routers (man, that just sounds disgusting)
In that case, nrf, I suggest you do not meditate deeply on the
functionality of the Physical Layer, whose scope includes male,
female, and gender-bender connectors.
>
>
>And you ask about the integrity of the background check procedure. Well, I
>am proposing using the same procedure that some employers today use for
>their job candidates, where they hire companies to fact-check your resume.
I don't remember the specifics, but I believe Nortel did something
like this for your case study writeups for the Architect
certification. Might have been a letter, might have been spot
checking.
One of the issues that I keep coming back to is that highly verified
certifications, be it a professional engineer, medical certification,
etc., which may use oral exams, peer-reviewed documents, etc., tend
not to be highly scalable or lend themselves to scaling the way it
would seem Cisco would like.
Of course, this is rough for the people that worked on sensitive or
classified networks (I can tell you what the candidate built, but
then I'll have to kill you).
Mind you, I have a friend that was updating the cabling in the
Pentagon, who still claims she put a test set on a random wire and
got the following telegraph message:
Many Indians. Send help.
Custer
:-)
Actually, not so :-), when we have the reality that a command post
heard 30-odd successive SOS messages, interspersed with "we are being
boarded", from the USS Pueblo, and dismissed it as "operator chatter".
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71479&t=71479
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
