|
Home > Archive > alt.certification.cisco > December 2002 > Those letter after your name
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Those letter after your name
|
|
| Schmuck 2002-12-26, 2:24 pm |
| Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
How many letters should you put after your name?
My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the
first few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant
and told me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
"CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
that make the CCNP redundant?
Matt. BSc(Phys. Hons I. USyd), PhD(failed), SCNA, CCNP(almost)
| |
|
| CCNA = Cisco certified network amateur = realy nothing
CCNP = Cisco Certification Not possible = nothing
CCIE = Cisco Certification is Expensive = that's a certification !!
"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
news:24819cc3.0212261156.cf58a2@posting.google.com...
> Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
>
> How many letters should you put after your name?
>
> My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
> MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the
> first few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant
> and told me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
>
> I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
>
> So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
> "CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
> because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
> can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
> that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
> that make the CCNP redundant?
>
> Matt. BSc(Phys. Hons I. USyd), PhD(failed), SCNA, CCNP(almost)
| |
|
|
"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
news:24819cc3.0212261156.cf58a2@posting.google.com...
> Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
>
> How many letters should you put after your name?
>
> My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
> MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the
> first few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant
> and told me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
>
> I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
>
> So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
> "CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
> because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
> can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
> that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
> that make the CCNP redundant?
>
> Matt. BSc(Phys. Hons I. USyd), PhD(failed), SCNA, CCNP(almost)
Well, I guess technically speaking the guy did earn the rights to those
titles, so I suppose he is allowed to do what he's doing, although I agree
it makes him look like a pretentious fool.
The CCNP does in fact cover ground that the CCIE does not cover (for
example, analog dial), so I suppose technically speaking there would be some
CCIE's who can't pass the CCNP. But for the most part I think it's
redundant.
I think the best mark of confidence is to not put any designations behind
your name and let your knowledge and accomplishments speak for themselves.
Vint Cerf doesn't need to put any letters after his name. Neither does Bob
Kahn. Those guys don't need to prove anything. I think that people who
list their letters after their name are a bit insecure.
But at least that guy isn't fabricating a cert like other people I see
here - like the infamous mythical "CCIE-written" cert, which Cisco has
emphatically said does not exist, but a lot of people seem to list after
their name anyway. Heck, if you're going to permit the CCIE-written, which
doesn't exist, then what's to stop the next person from making up another
designation that doesn't exist? Next, you'll have people claiming to be
CCIE-A (A for attempted, for people who have tried but failed the written),
and CCIE-P (P for prospective, for people who haven't even tried the
written, but just thought about attempting it). Hey, I have a PhD-P, law
degree-P, medical degree-P, and and MBA-P, all from Harvard.
| |
| Jonathan 2002-12-26, 4:24 pm |
|
"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
news:24819cc3.0212261156.cf58a2@posting.google.com...
> Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
>
> How many letters should you put after your name?
>
Jonathan
NNCSE, NNCSS (x3), CCNP, CCDP, CCNA, CCDA, MCSE NT4, MCSE Win2K, MCP+I, MCP,
A+
Is that too many?
I really should get some more...
BA, AAS, ...
Let's see if anyone can figure out what these are!
AAM, GCM, NDSM, ASR, OSR, NCOPD...
I am not looking at Hansang for the answer...
> My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
> MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the
> first few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant
> and told me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
>
> I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
>
> So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
> "CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
> because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
> can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
> that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
> that make the CCNP redundant?
>
Yes... because some idiotic human resources puke will not recognize a CCDP
.... but will key in on a CCNA...
Also, there are smart systems out there looking for keywords... so, if they
want a CCNA, and you have a CCNP, but don't mention the CCNA, you get
boinkerated.
Jonathan
> Matt. BSc(Phys. Hons I. USyd), PhD(failed), SCNA, CCNP(almost)
| |
| Hansang Bae 2002-12-26, 4:24 pm |
| In article <aufqvr01k5e@enews4.newsguy.com>, "Jonathan"
<jrcdehc@nospam.nospam.\hotmail.com> says...
[snip]
> Let's see if anyone can figure out what these are!
>
> AAM, GCM, NDSM, ASR, OSR, NCOPD...
> I am not looking at Hansang for the answer...
That'd be too easy. What...no MSM?? DSC?!? 
As to the original poster's question, I guess it's up to the individual.
I will agree that CCNA *and* CCNP is a bit redundant.
--
hsb
"Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
*************** USE ROT13 TO SEE MY EMAIL ADDRESS ****************
******************************
******************************
********
Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
******************************
******************************
********
| |
| Hansang Bae 2002-12-26, 5:24 pm |
| In article <omKO9.466178$WL3.124857@rwcrnsc54>, noglikirf@hotmail.com
says...
[snip]
> Hey, I have a PhD-P, law
> degree-P, medical degree-P, and and MBA-P, all from Harvard.
You too!! I thought I was the only one!
Actually, I once saw "CCNP -1" As in one more test needed for the NP
cert. Needless to say, that guy didn't get to the interview process.
--
hsb
"Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
*************** USE ROT13 TO SEE MY EMAIL ADDRESS ****************
******************************
******************************
********
Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
******************************
******************************
********
| |
| trevor 2002-12-26, 5:24 pm |
| You are right, it just makes them look like wankers. Those prequalifiers are
a trivial waste of space and make you look very dumb. Thats why I never
include such things as MCP, MCP+I, CCNA, CCDA and MOUS... would make me look
dumb.
bobwonky
B.E.(Electronics & Comms. Systems Engineering, Hons I)
B.Sc.(Applied Mathematics, Hons. I)
CCA, CCNP, CCDP, MCSE+I(NT4), MCSE(2K), MCDBA, MCSA, OCA
"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
news:24819cc3.0212261156.cf58a2@posting.google.com...
> Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
>
> How many letters should you put after your name?
>
> My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
> MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the
> first few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant
> and told me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
>
> I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
>
> So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
> "CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
> because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
> can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
> that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
> that make the CCNP redundant?
>
> Matt. BSc(Phys. Hons I. USyd), PhD(failed), SCNA, CCNP(almost)
| |
| supernet 2002-12-26, 7:24 pm |
| hmmm, interesting...
Yoshi
MSCS, BSCS, Senior High, Junior High, Elementary, Kindergarten
"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
news:24819cc3.0212261156.cf58a2@posting.google.com...
> Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
>
> How many letters should you put after your name?
>
> My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
> MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the
> first few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant
> and told me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
>
> I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
>
> So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
> "CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
> because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
> can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
> that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
> that make the CCNP redundant?
>
> Matt. BSc(Phys. Hons I. USyd), PhD(failed), SCNA, CCNP(almost)
| |
| Jonathan 2002-12-26, 8:24 pm |
|
"Hansang Bae" <uonr@alp.ee.pbz> wrote in message
news:MPG.18754ab6d76d72bb989691@news-server.nyc.rr.com...
> In article <aufqvr01k5e@enews4.newsguy.com>, "Jonathan"
> <jrcdehc@nospam.nospam.\hotmail.com> says...
> [snip]
> > Let's see if anyone can figure out what these are!
> >
> > AAM, GCM, NDSM, ASR, OSR, NCOPD...
> > I am not looking at Hansang for the answer...
>
> That'd be too easy. What...no MSM?? DSC?!?
>
I was just a CPL in a place that didn't believe in recognizing anything or
anyone... and the whole combat thing was for units that were not mine...
> As to the original poster's question, I guess it's up to the individual.
> I will agree that CCNA *and* CCNP is a bit redundant.
>
depends...
J
> --
>
> hsb
>
> "Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
> *************** USE ROT13 TO SEE MY EMAIL ADDRESS ****************
> ******************************
******************************
********
> Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
> reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
> ******************************
******************************
********
| |
| freak 2002-12-26, 10:08 pm |
| quote:
Originally posted by trevor
You are right, it just makes them look like wankers. Those prequalifiers are
a trivial waste of space and make you look very dumb. Thats why I never
include such things as MCP, MCP+I, CCNA, CCDA and MOUS... would make me look
dumb.
bobwonky
B.E.(Electronics & Comms. Systems Engineering, Hons I)
B.Sc.(Applied Mathematics, Hons. I)
CCA, CCNP, CCDP, MCSE+I(NT4), MCSE(2K), MCDBA, MCSA, OCA
[/color]
then why do you list MCSA in your list of certs? Doesn't your MCSE already cover that and then some?
Personally, I list my certs because I post a lot on different forums, answering questions from people who do not know me. That way, they can somewhat gauge what the guy who answers them actually knows, and give a different weight to the asnwer they receive.
If that makes me a wanker in others' eyes, I could not care less about that. Their opinion is worth about as much as that white stuff that accumulates at the corner of your lips when you sleep with your mouth half open... | |
| Bernie 2002-12-27, 1:24 am |
| On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 23:08:57 -0500, freak
<freak.gayki@mail.examnotes.net> wrote:
>
>trevor wrote:
>> *You are right, it just makes them look like wankers. Those
>> prequalifiers are
>> a trivial waste of space and make you look very dumb. Thats why I
>> never
>> include such things as MCP, MCP+I, CCNA, CCDA and MOUS... would make
>> me look
>> dumb.
>>
>> bobwonky
>> B.E.(Electronics & Comms. Systems Engineering, Hons I)
>> B.Sc.(Applied Mathematics, Hons. I)
>> CCA, CCNP, CCDP, MCSE+I(NT4), MCSE(2K), MCDBA, MCSA, OCA
>> *
>
>
>then why do you list MCSA in your list of certs? Doesn't your MCSE
>already cover that and then some?
>
>Personally, I list my certs because I post a lot on different forums,
>answering questions from people who do not know me. That way, they can
>somewhat gauge what the guy who answers them actually knows, and give a
>different weight to the asnwer they receive.
>
>If that makes me a wanker in others' eyes, I could not care less about
>that. Their opinion is worth about as much as that white stuff that
>accumulates at the corner of your lips when you sleep with your mouth
>half open...[/color]
I'm not trying to be contentious, but you are contradicting yourself.
First you say that you do this so that people can gauge your
expertise, and then you note that the very same undermines the effort
by making people think you are a wanker. I would also suggest that if
a person thinks that you are a god on a particular subject because you
have a certain set of letters next to your name, then *their* opinion
is worth the same as that white stuff.
Anyway, I would think that if the goal is to have people know how much
you know that you wouldn't want those same letters to make you look
like a know-nothing wanker. My point is that in *this* particular
forum unless you are listing a CCIE number, the listing of the certs
is pretty much assumed to mean the person doesn't know a whole lot.
So listing them does not give credibility *here*. Maybe in the MCSE
group it adds credibility, but here it detracts.
Not that you list your certs here, I don't recall whether or not you
do. I mention this simply because you state that your goal is to let
people know your level, and I am simply giving a helpful tip to you
about the general assumptions people around here make about people's
levels. So in case you are new around here, posting the list of certs
generally leads to the assumption that the statements made are not so
credible--sort of a reverse stigma.
--Bernie
| |
|
| <snip> [colo
r=darkred]
> >> >
> >If that makes me a wanker in others' eyes, I could not care less about
> >that. Their opinion is worth about as much as that white stuff that
> >accumulates at the corner of your lips when you sleep with your mouth
> >half open...
>
> I'm not trying to be contentious, but you are contradicting yourself.
> First you say that you do this so that people can gauge your
> expertise, and then you note that the very same undermines the effort
> by making people think you are a wanker. I would also suggest that if
> a person thinks that you are a god on a particular subject because you
> have a certain set of letters next to your name, then *their* opinion
> is worth the same as that white stuff.
>
> Anyway, I would think that if the goal is to have people know how much
> you know that you wouldn't want those same letters to make you look
> like a know-nothing wanker. My point is that in *this* particular
> forum unless you are listing a CCIE number, the listing of the certs
> is pretty much assumed to mean the person doesn't know a whole lot.
> So listing them does not give credibility *here*. Maybe in the MCSE
> group it adds credibility, but here it detracts.
>
> Not that you list your certs here, I don't recall whether or not you
> do. I mention this simply because you state that your goal is to let
> people know your level, and I am simply giving a helpful tip to you
> about the general assumptions people around here make about people's
> levels. So in case you are new around here, posting the list of certs
> generally leads to the assumption that the statements made are not so
> credible--sort of a reverse stigma.[/color]
I have to concur. Listing your certs on this forum, especially if it's not
a CCIE or a JNCIE number, seems to smack of just trying too hard to impress
people. Even if it is one of the IE certs, it still seems to be a bit
pretentious. My take is that if you know your stuff, then you know your
stuff, and if you don't, then you don't. Having or not having a cert isn't
going to change anything.
>
> --Bernie
| |
| Charlie Bruce 2002-12-27, 8:24 am |
| The trend seems to be against posting certs.
Too bad.
Public opinion sure isn't something I put a lot of faith in, look at our
elected officials.
Charlie CCNP,CNE,MCSE
"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
news:24819cc3.0212261156.cf58a2@posting.google.com...
> Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
>
> How many letters should you put after your name?
>
> My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
> MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the
> first few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant
> and told me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
>
> I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
>
> So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
> "CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
> because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
> can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
> that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
> that make the CCNP redundant?
>
> Matt. BSc(Phys. Hons I. USyd), PhD(failed), SCNA, CCNP(almost)
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
| |
| bobwonky 2002-12-27, 8:24 am |
|
"freak" <freak.gayki@mail.examnotes.net> wrote in message
news:freak.gayki@mail.examnotes.net...
>
> trevor wrote:
> > *You are right, it just makes them look like wankers. Those
> > prequalifiers are
> > a trivial waste of space and make you look very dumb. Thats why I
> > never
> > include such things as MCP, MCP+I, CCNA, CCDA and MOUS... would make
> > me look
> > dumb.
> >
> > bobwonky
> > B.E.(Electronics & Comms. Systems Engineering, Hons I)
> > B.Sc.(Applied Mathematics, Hons. I)
> > CCA, CCNP, CCDP, MCSE+I(NT4), MCSE(2K), MCDBA, MCSA, OCA
> > *
>
>
> then why do you list MCSA in your list of certs? Doesn't your MCSE
> already cover that and then some?
>
> Personally, I list my certs because I post a lot on different forums,
> answering questions from people who do not know me. That way, they can
> somewhat gauge what the guy who answers them actually knows, and give a
> different weight to the asnwer they receive.
>
> If that makes me a wanker in others' eyes, I could not care less about
> that. Their opinion is worth about as much as that white stuff that
> accumulates at the corner of your lips when you sleep with your mouth
> half open...
>[/color]
If you would have done a little investigating (skills which you obviously
lack) you would have found that if one holds an MCSE, one is required to
pass an additional exam to gain MCSA. Is it worth listing MCSA just because
of a difference in one exam? Then maybe i shouldnt list my Citrix CCA
because that requires only one exam. Personally I think you should try out
Google before you go yapping your mouth away.
bobwonky
| |
| Johnny Routin 2002-12-27, 8:24 am |
|
The companies providing the certification programs usually have guidelines
for the use of certs in signatures, business cards, etc. With Cisco the
rule is to only use the highest level attained. So as you said, as CCNA is
a prerequisite for CCNP, once you are CCNP you should no longer use CCNA as
that's a given. Same with CCDA, CCDP. I believe it is the same with M$.
If you are MCSE then you shouldn't use MCP as that's implied. The only
exception might be in a resume where you'd want to show the progression and
timeframes.
IMO, if you thumb your now at these guidelines and list every redundant cert
then you're probably trying to make up for your small penis size by having a
ridiculously long sig ;-) Either that or because you couldn't become a PhD
or MD like your mamma wanted, you now are trying to impress people with lots
of letters for simple certs that many high school kids now have such as MCP,
MCSE, and CCNA. What I like to call a letter chaser...
JR
--
Johnny Routin
"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
news:24819cc3.0212261156.cf58a2@posting.google.com...
> Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
>
> How many letters should you put after your name?
>
> My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
> MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the
> first few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant
> and told me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
>
> I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
>
> So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
> "CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
> because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
> can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
> that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
> that make the CCNP redundant?
>
> Matt. BSc(Phys. Hons I. USyd), PhD(failed), SCNA, CCNP(almost)
| |
| Johnny Routin 2002-12-27, 8:24 am |
| > designation that doesn't exist? Next, you'll have people claiming to be
> CCIE-A (A for attempted, for people who have tried but failed the
written),
> and CCIE-P (P for prospective, for people who haven't even tried the
> written, but just thought about attempting it). Hey, I have a PhD-P,
law
Heheh... I saw a post in a alt.certification.cisco recently where the sig
claimed CCIE qualified (award pending). WTF that is I don't know as the day
you pass the lab you get your number! I asked the poster wtf that meant but
got no response.
JR
--
Johnny Routin
| |
| Johnny Routin 2002-12-27, 9:24 am |
| >
> Yoshi
> MSCS, BSCS, Senior High, Junior High, Elementary, Kindergarten
ROFL... all that and no pre-school?
JR
--
Johnny Routin
| |
| Bernie 2002-12-27, 11:24 am |
| On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 07:40:29 -0600, "Charlie Bruce" <cbruce@mvn.net>
wrote:
>The trend seems to be against posting certs.
>Too bad.
Well I say that is too bad that the vast majority of certs aren't all
that credible. You wouldn't see this trend if the MCSE really did
mean god-like status, or if the CCNA wasn't passable by a complete
newbie after a 4.5 day course and a braindump website. This speaks to
the pathetic nature of these certs not to the pompousness of the
general populace.
>Public opinion sure isn't something I put a lot of faith in, look at our
>elected officials.
>
>Charlie CCNP,CNE,MCSE
>
>
>"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
>news:24819cc3.0212261156.cf58a2@posting.google.com...
>> Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
>>
>> How many letters should you put after your name?
>>
>> My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
>> MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the
>> first few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant
>> and told me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
>>
>> I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
>>
>> So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
>> "CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
>> because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
>> can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
>> that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
>> that make the CCNP redundant?
>>
>> Matt. BSc(Phys. Hons I. USyd), PhD(failed), SCNA, CCNP(almost)
>
>
>
>
>-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
>http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
>-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
--Bernie
| |
| freak 2002-12-27, 12:26 pm |
| quote:
Originally posted by bobwonky
"freak" <freak.gayki@mail.examnotes.net> wrote in message
news:freak.gayki@mail.examnotes.net...
>
> trevor wrote:
> > *You are right, it just makes them look like wankers. Those
> > prequalifiers are
> > a trivial waste of space and make you look very dumb. Thats why I
> > never
> > include such things as MCP, MCP+I, CCNA, CCDA and MOUS... would make
> > me look
> > dumb.
> >
> > bobwonky
> > B.E.(Electronics & Comms. Systems Engineering, Hons I)
> > B.Sc.(Applied Mathematics, Hons. I)
> > CCA, CCNP, CCDP, MCSE+I(NT4), MCSE(2K), MCDBA, MCSA, OCA
> > *
>
>
> then why do you list MCSA in your list of certs? Doesn't your MCSE
> already cover that and then some?
>
> Personally, I list my certs because I post a lot on different forums,
> answering questions from people who do not know me. That way, they can
> somewhat gauge what the guy who answers them actually knows, and give a
> different weight to the asnwer they receive.
>
> If that makes me a wanker in others' eyes, I could not care less about
> that. Their opinion is worth about as much as that white stuff that
> accumulates at the corner of your lips when you sleep with your mouth
> half open...
>[/color]
If you would have done a little investigating (skills which you obviously
lack) you would have found that if one holds an MCSE, one is required to
pass an additional exam to gain MCSA. Is it worth listing MCSA just because
of a difference in one exam? Then maybe i shouldnt list my Citrix CCA
because that requires only one exam. Personally I think you should try out
Google before you go yapping your mouth away.
bobwonky
Yapping my mouth away? No investigative skills? Good for you, you just won the punk of the week award.
You're the one speaking ill of others for what you perceive is their being "wankers".
Second of all, I hold both the MCSE and the MCSA, which you clearly don't know... because you did not... dare I say investigate? I know exactly what is required to have an MCSA. I taught the classes required as an MCT. And if you took it, you also know that if you are an MCSE, you've already covered the material for the 218 in the 215, 216 and 217 tests, hence the redundancy of listing the MCSA and the MCSE in your sig file.
My point was that you guys are quick to judge others and call them names on the basis of what *you* think is right. I was just illustrating the fact that for some forum readers, it is interesting to know what the guy who is answering your questions actually has for certs, in order to see if you can put some faith in the aforementioned answer or not.
For example, let's say I ask a question on the CCIE, and Joe Poster answers me. I would want to know if the Joe POster in question actually *has* a CCIE in order to see how valid the answer may be... makes sense? If not, don't worry. It will come... | |
| featherbabe 2002-12-27, 12:38 pm |
| quote:
Originally posted by freak
Yapping my mouth away? No investigative skills? Good for you, you just won the punk of the week award.
You're the one speaking ill of others for what you perceive is their being "wankers".
Second of all, I hold both the MCSE and the MCSA, which you clearly don't know... because you did not... dare I say investigate? I know exactly what is required to have an MCSA. I taught the classes required as an MCT. And if you took it, you also know that if you are an MCSE, you've already covered the material for the 218 in the 215, 216 and 217 tests, hence the redundancy of listing the MCSA and the MCSE in your sig file.
My point was that you guys are quick to judge others and call them names on the basis of what *you* think is right. I was just illustrating the fact that for some forum readers, it is interesting to know what the guy who is answering your questions actually has for certs, in order to see if you can put some faith in the aforementioned answer or not.
For example, let's say I ask a question on the CCIE, and Joe Poster answers me. I would want to know if the Joe POster in question actually *has* a CCIE in order to see how valid the answer may be... makes sense? If not, don't worry. It will come...
You're exactly right freak!!!! I am A+.... trying to figure out which way I want to go with other certs... and it is guys like you that post their certs...so I can find out from your experience if that is the way I want to go!!!!!!!
THANK YOU!!!!!!!!
AND....did you notice they are all guests? Maybe their mammas should have been more concerned with teaching them manners than wanting them to be MD's!!!!!!! | |
| freak 2002-12-27, 12:50 pm |
| lol
Actually they are guests because we are pulling the content of their message from news groups and incorporating them into our forum...
I am tired of people saying stuff like "the CCNA means nothing and it is a useless cert" just because they are studying for the CCIE. These guys forget where they came from. Once upon a time, they were newbies too, and the CCNA was probably a big deal when they were studying for it. Sure it is an entry level cert, but what's the point in looking down on it now?
I just don't get that attitude... | |
| featherbabe 2002-12-27, 12:58 pm |
| quote:
Originally posted by freak
lol
Actually they are guests because we are pulling the content of their message from news groups and incorporating them into our forum...
I just don't get that attitude...
Laffin..yeah I caught that after I posted... I came in from seeing who was online... goofy me didn't look what forum I was in....started reading and it p!ssed me off so bad I just started typing!!!!!!!
That is one of my big pet peaves in life....
People who forget where they come from!!!
But they are the types that get over confident in their skills and are shocked and thrown for a real loop when they are replaced!!!!!!!
You remember how the jocks acted in school?
And where are most of them now? Not near as successful as us "geeks"
Thats what those guys remind me of! Big dumb jocks!!!!!
I see no point to their arguement...other than they are bored and acting stupid!!! | |
| Bernie 2002-12-27, 2:24 pm |
| On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 09:22:55 -0500, "Johnny Routin"
<jroutin@sexpistols.com> wrote:
>>
>> Yoshi
>> MSCS, BSCS, Senior High, Junior High, Elementary, Kindergarten
>
>
>ROFL... all that and no pre-school?
He must not be able to put the pegs in the right holes then--I can't
hire someone like that!
--Bernie
| |
|
|
"Bernie" <Bernie@weekend.com> wrote in message
news:95C09280A27E23A2.BF573AB161DEFD71.036D543D0B5DA5B9@lp.airnews.net...
> On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 07:40:29 -0600, "Charlie Bruce" <cbruce@mvn.net>
> wrote:
>
> >The trend seems to be against posting certs.
> >Too bad.
>
> Well I say that is too bad that the vast majority of certs aren't all
> that credible. You wouldn't see this trend if the MCSE really did
> mean god-like status, or if the CCNA wasn't passable by a complete
> newbie after a 4.5 day course and a braindump website. This speaks to
> the pathetic nature of these certs not to the pompousness of the
> general populace.
Actually, here I would disagree with you. Even if the accomplishment was
highly impressive, I would still consider it somewhat inappropriate and
arrogant for someone to list in his signature here on this forum.
For example, what if Scott McNealy was on this newsgroup and signed all his
postings with the designation 'MBA-Stanford'? What if Andrew Grove came
here and signed all his postings with 'PhD-Berkeley'? Heck, what if George
Bush came here and included in his signature 'MBA-Harvard'? I think
everybody would agree that it would be most gauche.
I believe that if you're good, not only do you have no need to couch
yourself in terms of designations, but to do so would degrade your response.
>
> >Public opinion sure isn't something I put a lot of faith in, look at our
> >elected officials.
> >
> >Charlie CCNP,CNE,MCSE
> >
> >
> >"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:24819cc3.0212261156.cf58a2@posting.google.com...
> >> Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
> >>
> >> How many letters should you put after your name?
> >>
> >> My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
> >> MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the
> >> first few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant
> >> and told me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
> >>
> >> I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
> >>
> >> So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
> >> "CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
> >> because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
> >> can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
> >> that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
> >> that make the CCNP redundant?
> >>
> >> Matt. BSc(Phys. Hons I. USyd), PhD(failed), SCNA, CCNP(almost)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> >http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> >-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
>
>
> --Bernie
| |
| Bernie 2002-12-27, 2:24 pm |
| On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 15:06:03 -0600, "Jonathan"
<jrcdehc@nospam.nospam.\hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
>news:24819cc3.0212261156.cf58a2@posting.google.com...
>> Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
>>
>> How many letters should you put after your name?
>>
>
>
>Jonathan
>NNCSE, NNCSS (x3), CCNP, CCDP, CCNA, CCDA, MCSE NT4, MCSE Win2K, MCP+I, MCP,
>A+
>
>Is that too many?
>
>I really should get some more...
>
>
>BA, AAS, ...
>
>
>Let's see if anyone can figure out what these are!
>
>AAM, GCM, NDSM, ASR, OSR, NCOPD...
>
>I am not looking at Hansang for the answer...
>
>
>> My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
>> MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the
>> first few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant
>> and told me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
>>
>> I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
>>
>> So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
>> "CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
>> because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
>> can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
>> that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
>> that make the CCNP redundant?
>>
>
>Yes... because some idiotic human resources puke will not recognize a CCDP
>... but will key in on a CCNA...
True, but that doesn't address why people put redundant stuff in their
sig on a NG. If I am putting my resume in a searchable database, then
sure, I list everything I have achieved, redundant or not. Usually
they can see the dates of the progression that way as well. But when
I get to a real interview, I list the non-redundant certs that I feel
are important when I am asked about them (I don't brag unprovoked, nor
do I list irrelevant ones to this job, such as A+). In a forum such
as this, there is no such reason to list the redundancy at all.
Do we not all know in here that CCNA is lower than CCNP? Or that CCDP
is only one exam different than the CCNP (not counting the CCDA)?
>Also, there are smart systems out there looking for keywords... so, if they
>want a CCNA, and you have a CCNP, but don't mention the CCNA, you get
>boinkerated.
Ok, but do those search the postings of anonymous individuals in
newsgroups? Or do they scan business cards sitting in those little
glass jars at the restaurant (waiting for the weekly raffle)?
The comment that was made was that some guy sat in an interview and
personally listed all the redundant certs as if they were
accomplishments. So he had already gotten through the bogus HR
screening process to a live body. It certainly wasn't necessary to
list everything at that stage of the game, anymore than it is
necessary to list redundant certs in this NG as part of one's sig.
--Bernie
| |
| Bernie 2002-12-27, 2:24 pm |
| On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:58:20 -0500, featherbabe
<featherbabe.gc48k@mail.examnotes.net> wrote:
>
>freak wrote:
>> *lol
>>
>> Actually they are guests because we are pulling the content of their
>> message from news groups and incorporating them into our forum...
>>
>> I just don't get that attitude... *
>
>Laffin..yeah I caught that after I posted... I came in from seeing who
>was online... goofy me didn't look what forum I was in....started
>reading and it p!ssed me off so bad I just started typing!!!!!!!
>
>That is one of my big pet peaves in life....
>
>People who forget where they come from!!!
>
>But they are the types that get over confident in their skills and are
>shocked and thrown for a real loop when they are replaced!!!!!!!
>
>You remember how the jocks acted in school?
>And where are most of them now? Not near as successful as us "geeks"
>
>Thats what those guys remind me of! Big dumb jocks!!!!!
>
>I see no point to their arguement...other than they are bored and
>acting stupid!!!
You simply know nothing about the subject or the people about which
you speak. LOL, you are the geeks and we are the jocks? Ha! Joke's
on you...
--Bernie
| |
| Bernie 2002-12-27, 2:24 pm |
| On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 19:28:37 GMT, "nrf" <noglikirf@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Bernie" <Bernie@weekend.com> wrote in message
>news:95C09280A27E23A2.BF573AB161DEFD71.036D543D0B5DA5B9@lp.airnews.net...
>> On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 07:40:29 -0600, "Charlie Bruce" <cbruce@mvn.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >The trend seems to be against posting certs.
>> >Too bad.
>>
>> Well I say that is too bad that the vast majority of certs aren't all
>> that credible. You wouldn't see this trend if the MCSE really did
>> mean god-like status, or if the CCNA wasn't passable by a complete
>> newbie after a 4.5 day course and a braindump website. This speaks to
>> the pathetic nature of these certs not to the pompousness of the
>> general populace.
>
>
>Actually, here I would disagree with you. Even if the accomplishment was
>highly impressive, I would still consider it somewhat inappropriate and
>arrogant for someone to list in his signature here on this forum.
>
>For example, what if Scott McNealy was on this newsgroup and signed all his
>postings with the designation 'MBA-Stanford'? What if Andrew Grove came
>here and signed all his postings with 'PhD-Berkeley'? Heck, what if George
>Bush came here and included in his signature 'MBA-Harvard'? I think
>everybody would agree that it would be most gauche.
>
>I believe that if you're good, not only do you have no need to couch
>yourself in terms of designations, but to do so would degrade your response.
Actually, you do know that I agree 100% with you on the subject. I
was commenting that the disillusionment with the whole certification
cottage industry has led many people to stop posting their certs next
to their name when previously they might have done so.
--Bernie
| |
| Johnny Routin 2002-12-27, 2:24 pm |
|
> I believe that if you're good, not only do you have no need to couch
> yourself in terms of designations, but to do so would degrade your
response.
Well said! I'm a firm believer in that exact philosophy. The problem as I
see it is that for many people the cert (and the letters after ones name) is
the goal. It should be that the knowledge is the goal and the cert is just
a validation of that knowledge (or at least it should be).
JR
--
Johnny Routin - PMCWSRU (Possessor of many certs which shall remain
unmentioned)
| |
| Johnny Routin 2002-12-27, 2:24 pm |
| > >You remember how the jocks acted in school?
> >And where are most of them now? Not near as successful as us "geeks"
> >
> >Thats what those guys remind me of! Big dumb jocks!!!!!
> >
> >I see no point to their arguement...other than they are bored and
> >acting stupid!!!
>
> You simply know nothing about the subject or the people about which
> you speak. LOL, you are the geeks and we are the jocks? Ha! Joke's
> on you...
>
>
> --Bernie
Heheheh... well put!
JR
--
Johnny Routin
| |
| Geoff Zinderdine 2002-12-27, 3:24 pm |
| While I agree with much of what has been said in this thread, it never
ceases to amaze me how much more time the highly accomplished engineers on
this list spend on these inconsequential meta-issues such as the value of
the certification process than on actual technical issues. While I do think
that most of these threads are meant as good-natured chiding or actual
advice, they do seem to generate more hot air than wind for one's sails.
When I scan a NG I *do* pay more attention to someone with a CCIE number
after there name than not. Over time, I have come to value the opinions of
people like Bernie, nrf/xavierchang, Priscilla Oppenheimer, Howard
Berkowitz, etc. that do not list certifications even when they have them.
This however takes time and context. Someone having the CCIE is a quick
means to judge authority though it is by no means the only or even a
certain means of assessment. Posting a number speaks to background, though I
have seen clueless posts from CCIEs and I also remember *those* posts and
their authors more than I would ordinary foolishness.
A newsgroup is obviously part of the public record and might be scrutinized
by potential employers. It also is definitely a means of networking with
employers and colleagues. In such light, it can be very germane that people
know that one has completed the CCIE. I didn't do the lab so that I can
hang a shiny plaque on my wall-- I did it to advance my career.
Contributing positively to the public record is one way of doing so. For
those that are already comfortably esconced in the industry, there is
probably no need to be recognized for one's certifications. For someone
come lately to the networking industry such as myself, certification has
opened previously closed doors and I have found work quickly while others
that have greater experience (though quite possibly lesser soft skills and
technical knowledge) are still unemployed.
Aren't there more important issues that we could address than the inflated
sigs of people trying to break into the industry? Besides, in the post 9/11
world they offer some much needed comic relief.
Cheers and best wishes for the New Year,
Geoff Zinderdine
CCIE 0x28AA
| |
| Geoff Zinderdine 2002-12-27, 3:24 pm |
| s/there/their
Reminder to self, eggnog and codeine are not conducive to proofreading.
Grrrr....
Geoff Z
"Geoff Zinderdine" <geoffz@mts.net> wrote in message
news:cW2P9.9107$7_.36611@news1.mts.net...
> While I agree with much of what has been said in this thread, it never
> ceases to amaze me how much more time the highly accomplished engineers on
> this list spend on these inconsequential meta-issues such as the value of
> the certification process than on actual technical issues. While I do
think
> that most of these threads are meant as good-natured chiding or actual
> advice, they do seem to generate more hot air than wind for one's sails.
>
> When I scan a NG I *do* pay more attention to someone with a CCIE number
> after there name than not. Over time, I have come to value the opinions
of
> people like Bernie, nrf/xavierchang, Priscilla Oppenheimer, Howard
> Berkowitz, etc. that do not list certifications even when they have them.
> This however takes time and context. Someone having the CCIE is a quick
> means to judge authority though it is by no means the only or even a
> certain means of assessment. Posting a number speaks to background, though
I
> have seen clueless posts from CCIEs and I also remember *those* posts and
> their authors more than I would ordinary foolishness.
>
> A newsgroup is obviously part of the public record and might be
scrutinized
> by potential employers. It also is definitely a means of networking with
> employers and colleagues. In such light, it can be very germane that
people
> know that one has completed the CCIE. I didn't do the lab so that I can
> hang a shiny plaque on my wall-- I did it to advance my career.
> Contributing positively to the public record is one way of doing so. For
> those that are already comfortably esconced in the industry, there is
> probably no need to be recognized for one's certifications. For someone
> come lately to the networking industry such as myself, certification has
> opened previously closed doors and I have found work quickly while others
> that have greater experience (though quite possibly lesser soft skills and
> technical knowledge) are still unemployed.
>
> Aren't there more important issues that we could address than the inflated
> sigs of people trying to break into the industry? Besides, in the post
9/11
> world they offer some much needed comic relief.
>
> Cheers and best wishes for the New Year,
>
> Geoff Zinderdine
> CCIE 0x28AA
>
>
| |
| Bernie 2002-12-27, 3:24 pm |
| On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 14:41:45 -0600, "Geoff Zinderdine"
<geoffz@mts.net> wrote:
>While I agree with much of what has been said in this thread, it never
>ceases to amaze me how much more time the highly accomplished engineers on
>this list spend on these inconsequential meta-issues such as the value of
>the certification process than on actual technical issues. While I do think
>that most of these threads are meant as good-natured chiding or actual
>advice, they do seem to generate more hot air than wind for one's sails.
It is sheer boredom that spurs these meta issues in this particular
NG. At least that is what fuels it for me. Two and a half years ago,
I answered many of the subnetting questions. After ten or so, I got
bored and stopped responding to those threads. Then I answered maybe
some dial-up questions from the CCNP track. Got bored with that too.
Then I answered some OSPF questions. Got bored with that as no one
seems to ask the interesting questions anymore. They want to know
what authentication is supported and how many LSA types there are. No
one wants a detailed explanation of the network types (well, rarely
someone does). No one asks about multicasting or IP-VPNs or L2 VPNs,
or anything that I find interesting these days. So I essentially
ignore all the threads that are rehashes of exam questions that have
been asked countless times and then I end up responding to the more
human topics of "whether to list certs in a sig or not." Pointless,
maybe. But in lieu of the technical subjects I find interesting,
human topics are the ones I find interesting.
>When I scan a NG I *do* pay more attention to someone with a CCIE number
>after there name than not. Over time, I have come to value the opinions of
>people like Bernie, nrf/xavierchang, Priscilla Oppenheimer, Howard
>Berkowitz, etc. that do not list certifications even when they have them.
>This however takes time and context. Someone having the CCIE is a quick
>means to judge authority though it is by no means the only or even a
>certain means of assessment. Posting a number speaks to background, though I
>have seen clueless posts from CCIEs and I also remember *those* posts and
>their authors more than I would ordinary foolishness.
True. As many have qualified, a CCIE number means something in terms
of credibility for the most part. I can at least understand why one
might list that. This thread however was started by the question of
why people list a CCNA if they have a CCIE (for example).
>A newsgroup is obviously part of the public record and might be scrutinized
>by potential employers. It also is definitely a means of networking with
>employers and colleagues. In such light, it can be very germane that people
>know that one has completed the CCIE. I didn't do the lab so that I can
>hang a shiny plaque on my wall-- I did it to advance my career.
>Contributing positively to the public record is one way of doing so. For
>those that are already comfortably esconced in the industry, there is
>probably no need to be recognized for one's certifications. For someone
>come lately to the networking industry such as myself, certification has
>opened previously closed doors and I have found work quickly while others
>that have greater experience (though quite possibly lesser soft skills and
>technical knowledge) are still unemployed.
I don't think anyone has chided anyone for seeking certification or
for being proud of their accomplishments. What started this was
someone who listened to a job applicant brag about redundant certs.
So having finished your CCIE (congrats, BTW) I am fairly sure that you
don't sit in an interview and go on about your previous CCNA and CCNP.
You would (should) say I am a CCIE (period).
>Aren't there more important issues that we could address than the inflated
>sigs of people trying to break into the industry? Besides, in the post 9/11
>world they offer some much needed comic relief.
I only wish. I keep waiting for people to ask about ATM or VPNs or
multicasting, etc...(when they do, I write a book as anyone here can
attest)
--Bernie
| |
| Johnny Routin 2002-12-27, 4:24 pm |
|
Well said and I would have to agree with you. However, much of this thread
was geared towards the listing redundant certs in ones signature in
violation of the usage guidelines, not on the merits of listing ones CCIE
number once that was achieved, although that was touched on as well.
Nice point on the time spent discussing inconsequential issues such as this
but I would hope this is due to the change freeze many organizations have
during the holidays and not due to the lack of work for highly skilled
engineers ;-)
JR
--
Johnny Routin
"Geoff Zinderdine" <geoffz@mts.net> wrote in message
news:cW2P9.9107$7_.36611@news1.mts.net...
> While I agree with much of what has been said in this thread, it never
> ceases to amaze me how much more time the highly accomplished engineers on
> this list spend on these inconsequential meta-issues such as the value of
> the certification process than on actual technical issues. While I do
think
> that most of these threads are meant as good-natured chiding or actual
> advice, they do seem to generate more hot air than wind for one's sails.
>
> When I scan a NG I *do* pay more attention to someone with a CCIE number
> after there name than not. Over time, I have come to value the opinions
of
> people like Bernie, nrf/xavierchang, Priscilla Oppenheimer, Howard
> Berkowitz, etc. that do not list certifications even when they have them.
> This however takes time and context. Someone having the CCIE is a quick
> means to judge authority though it is by no means the only or even a
> certain means of assessment. Posting a number speaks to background, though
I
> have seen clueless posts from CCIEs and I also remember *those* posts and
> their authors more than I would ordinary foolishness.
>
> A newsgroup is obviously part of the public record and might be
scrutinized
> by potential employers. It also is definitely a means of networking with
> employers and colleagues. In such light, it can be very germane that
people
> know that one has completed the CCIE. I didn't do the lab so that I can
> hang a shiny plaque on my wall-- I did it to advance my career.
> Contributing positively to the public record is one way of doing so. For
> those that are already comfortably esconced in the industry, there is
> probably no need to be recognized for one's certifications. For someone
> come lately to the networking industry such as myself, certification has
> opened previously closed doors and I have found work quickly while others
> that have greater experience (though quite possibly lesser soft skills and
> technical knowledge) are still unemployed.
>
> Aren't there more important issues that we could address than the inflated
> sigs of people trying to break into the industry? Besides, in the post
9/11
> world they offer some much needed comic relief.
>
> Cheers and best wishes for the New Year,
>
> Geoff Zinderdine
> CCIE 0x28AA
>
>
| |
| afropuff 2002-12-27, 6:24 pm |
| From my understanding you would only want to do that on a resume due to the
fact that there are some n00b employers/scanners that check for CCNA or
MCP...
-fro
"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
news:24819cc3.0212261156.cf58a2@posting.google.com...
> Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
>
> How many letters should you put after your name?
>
> My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
> MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the
> first few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant
> and told me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
>
> I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
>
> So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
> "CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
> because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
> can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
> that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
> that make the CCNP redundant?
>
> Matt. BSc(Phys. Hons I. USyd), PhD(failed), SCNA, CCNP(almost)
| |
| Hansang Bae 2002-12-27, 7:24 pm |
| In article <freak.gc48j@mail.examnotes.net>,
freak.gc48j@mail.examnotes.net says...
> I am tired of people saying stuff like "the CCNA means nothing and it
> is a useless cert" just because they are studying for the CCIE. These
> guys forget where they came from. Once upon a time, they were newbies
> too, and the CCNA was probably a big deal when they were studying for
> it. Sure it is an entry level cert, but what's the point in looking
> down on it now?
I've never looked down on CCNA. But I've always looked down on people
who think it's a free pass to the head-of-line. That is the crux of
the problem. People who are duped into thinking it's a big deal or
people who think it's a free pass to the head of the line.
> I just don't get that attitude...
--
hsb
"Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
*************** USE ROT13 TO SEE MY EMAIL ADDRESS ****************
******************************
******************************
********
Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
******************************
******************************
********
| |
| Acer0001 2002-12-27, 8:24 pm |
| You know... I have spent some time reading postings on this newsgroup and
I can honestly say that individuals like Bernie, Hansang and others have
earned my respect. Thier qualification resides in thier answers to
difficult questions and scenerios and being correct with thier information.
I have no idea whether they are CCNA,CCNP, CCIE or whatever, but I respect
them for thier experience and knowledge. For me, that speaks for itself.
Acer
On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 08:18:20 -0600, Johnny Routin wrote:
> The companies providing the certification programs usually have
> guidelines for the use of certs in signatures, business cards, etc. With
> Cisco the rule is to only use the highest level attained. So as you
> said, as CCNA is a prerequisite for CCNP, once you are CCNP you should
> no longer use CCNA as that's a given. Same with CCDA, CCDP. I believe
> it is the same with M$. If you are MCSE then you shouldn't use MCP as
> that's implied. The only exception might be in a resume where you'd
> want to show the progression and timeframes.
>
> IMO, if you thumb your now at these guidelines and list every redundant
> cert then you're probably trying to make up for your small penis size by
> having a ridiculously long sig ;-) Either that or because you couldn't
> become a PhD or MD like your mamma wanted, you now are trying to impress
> people with lots of letters for simple certs that many high school kids
> now have such as MCP, MCSE, and CCNA. What I like to call a letter
> chaser...
>
>
> JR
> --
> Johnny Routin
>
>
>
>
> "Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
> news:24819cc3.0212261156.cf58a2@posting.google.com...
>> Just to throw the cat amoung the pigeons...
>>
>> How many letters should you put after your name?
>>
>> My remember once I interviewed a guy who claimed he was an MCP, MCSE,
>> MSCE (I) and a couple of others. When I explained to him that the first
>> few were just prequalifiers for the last he got all indignant and told
>> me that he'd earned the right to use all those titles.
>>
>> I thought it just made him look like a wanker.
>>
>> So what about in the Cisco world? Does it really mean anything to be a
>> "CCNA, CCNP, CCIE"? By my thinking, logic, the CCNA is redundant,
>> because its a prerequirement for the CCNP, but in theory at least you
>> can earn a CCIE without anything having sat anything else. Having said
>> that, how many CCIEs don't have the knowledge to pass the CCNP? Does
>> that make the CCNP redundant?
>>
>> Matt. BSc(Phys. Hons I. USyd), PhD(failed), SCNA, CCNP(almost)
| |
| bobwonky 2002-12-27, 8:24 pm |
| > Yapping my mouth away? No investigative skills? Good for you, you just
> won the punk of the week award.
>
> You're the one speaking ill of others for what you perceive is their
> being "wankers".
>
> Second of all, I hold both the MCSE and the MCSA, which you clearly
> don't know... because you did not... dare I say investigate? I know
> exactly what is required to have an MCSA. I taught the classes required
> as an MCT. And if you took it, you also know that if you are an MCSE,
> you've already covered the material for the 218 in the 215, 216 and 217
> tests, hence the redundancy of listing the MCSA and the MCSE in your
> sig file.
>
> My point was that you guys are quick to judge others and call them
> names on the basis of what *you* think is right. I was just
> illustrating the fact that for some forum readers, it is interesting to
> know what the guy who is answering your questions actually has for
> certs, in order to see if you can put some faith in the aforementioned
> answer or not.
>
> For example, let's say I ask a question on the CCIE, and Joe Poster
> answers me. I would want to know if the Joe POster in question actually
> *has* a CCIE in order to see how valid the answer may be... makes
> sense? If not, don't worry. It will come...
Yes, I'm afraid you have no investigating skills at all.
So tell me this, why on earth doesn't Microsoft award an MCSA to MCSE
holders, as you question things based upon redundancy. For an MCT you
certainly lack insight into what you teach you punk.
| |
| Schmuck 2002-12-27, 9:24 pm |
| "Geoff Zinderdine" <geoffz@mts.net> wrote in message
> A newsgroup is obviously part of the public record and might be scrutinized
> by potential employers.
Shit.
| |
| Bernie 2002-12-27, 10:24 pm |
| On 27 Dec 2002 19:04:46 -0800, yamahasw40@latinmail.com (Schmuck)
wrote:
>"Geoff Zinderdine" <geoffz@mts.net> wrote in message
>
>> A newsgroup is obviously part of the public record and might be scrutinized
>> by potential employers.
>
>Shit.
ROFL!!!
--Bernie
| |
| Bernie 2002-12-27, 11:24 pm |
| On Sat, 28 Dec 2002 00:45:36 GMT, Hansang Bae <uonr@alp.ee.pbz> wrote:
>In article <freak.gc48j@mail.examnotes.net>,
>freak.gc48j@mail.examnotes.net says...
>> I am tired of people saying stuff like "the CCNA means nothing and it
>> is a useless cert" just because they are studying for the CCIE. These
>> guys forget where they came from. Once upon a time, they were newbies
>> too, and the CCNA was probably a big deal when they were studying for
>> it. Sure it is an entry level cert, but what's the point in looking
>> down on it now?
>
>I've never looked down on CCNA. But I've always looked down on people
>who think it's a free pass to the head-of-line. That is the crux of
>the problem. People who are duped into thinking it's a big deal or
>people who think it's a free pass to the head of the line.
That, but also the fact that you can't assume anything anymore by the
fact that someone has a CCNA.
If we could assume that a person spent time studying and learning all
the concepts, then it would follow that the CCNA represents exactly
what it is supposed to represent. However, today cheat tools are
readily available and accessible to any who desires to use them. So I
can neither assume that someone cheated nor passed the right way.
What can I assume? Nothing, right? So what does it mean to me when
someone says they got their CCNA? Not much, because I don't know if
they simply memorized the questions or if they actually learned
anything. Simply put, I still need more info than just the fact that
they have a CCNA.
If I say that the CCNA doesn't mean much anymore (I'm not actually the
person that said this though), I simply mean that you cannot tell
anything just by someone having the cert anymore. As an example,
suppose I am in a Chemistry class and there is an exam, and suppose
that the fact arises that 25% of the class cheated on the exam. So my
neighbor leans over and brags to me that he got a 90 on it. My next
question is, "Did you cheat to get that 90 or did you do it honestly?"
Any exam or cert is only as meaningful as cheating is rare. If
cheating becomes more common, then the cert becomes less meaningful.
By comparison, for someone that has a CCIE, odds are they truly earned
it because cheating is not rampant (yet?). Comparing the two has
nothing to do with which one I am studying for (neither in my case),
nor does it have anything to do with not remembering where I came
from. I simply remember back when you could not find a CCNA braindump
or a rumor of one to be had.
For people that spend the time to study and learn, I applaud them in
their accomplishments, whether it be CCNA or CCIE.
--Bernie
| |
| supernet 2002-12-28, 12:24 am |
| Yeah, I took the foundation path...
"Johnny Routin" <jroutin@sexpistols.com> wrote in message
news:A5KcnYICsYrd_5GjXTWc3g@gi
ganews.com...
> >
> > Yoshi
> > MSCS, BSCS, Senior High, Junior High, Elementary, Kindergarten
>
>
> ROFL... all that and no pre-school?
>
>
> JR
> --
> Johnny Routin
>
>
>
>
| |
|
|
"Geoff Zinderdine" <geoffz@mts.net> wrote in message
news:cW2P9.9107$7_.36611@news1.mts.net...
> While I agree with much of what has been said in this thread, it never
> ceases to amaze me how much more time the highly accomplished engineers on
> this list spend on these inconsequential meta-issues such as the value of
> the certification process than on actual technical issues. While I do
think
> that most of these threads are meant as good-natured chiding or actual
> advice, they do seem to generate more hot air than wind for one's sails.
>
> When I scan a NG I *do* pay more attention to someone with a CCIE number
> after there name than not. Over time, I have come to value the opinions
of
> people like Bernie, nrf/xavierchang,
Heh heh. If I'm not more careful, you're gonna figure out all my other
aliases soon.
>Priscilla Oppenheimer, Howard
> Berkowitz, etc. that do not list certifications even when they have them.
> This however takes time and context. Someone having the CCIE is a quick
> means to judge authority though it is by no means the only or even a
> certain means of assessment. Posting a number speaks to background, though
I
> have seen clueless posts from CCIEs and I also remember *those* posts and
> their authors more than I would ordinary foolishness.
What I especially despise, more than anything else, is certified people who
think that they automatically know more than somebody who doesn't hold the
cert they hold - as if the cert is some kind of a trump card. Networking
certs are not useful in a game of bridge (pun intended). The only 'trump
cards' that perhaps should be acknowledged are authorship of spec's (i.e.
you don't tell Vint Cerf how TCP/IP works, for example). Certs are no trump
card.
This is often coupled with the utter foolishness of assuming that if
somebody doesn't list their certs, that must mean they don't hold any. So
every once in awhile I am confronted with the Kafka-esque tragicomedy of
somebody not liking one of my responses and then challenging me with
something of the likes of :"Are you a CCxx?", and usually with the followup
of "Since you're not a CCxx, and I am, that means that you're wrong and I'm
right."
WTF is up with that bullcr*p?
>
> A newsgroup is obviously part of the public record and might be
scrutinized
> by potential employers. It also is definitely a means of networking with
> employers and colleagues. In such light, it can be very germane that
people
> know that one has completed the CCIE. I didn't do the lab so that I can
> hang a shiny plaque on my wall-- I did it to advance my career.
> Contributing positively to the public record is one way of doing so. For
> those that are already comfortably esconced in the industry, there is
> probably no need to be recognized for one's certifications. For someone
> come lately to the networking industry such as myself, certification has
> opened previously closed doors and I have found work quickly while others
> that have greater experience (though quite possibly lesser soft skills and
> technical knowledge) are still unemployed.
>
> Aren't there more important issues that we could address than the inflated
> sigs of people trying to break into the industry? Besides, in the post
9/11
> world they offer some much needed comic relief.
>
> Cheers and best wishes for the New Year,
>
> Geoff Zinderdine
> CCIE 0x28AA
>
>
| |
| Bernie 2002-12-30, 2:24 am |
| On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 06:48:34 GMT, "nrf" <noglikirf@hotmail.com> wrote:
>This is often coupled with the utter foolishness of assuming that if
>somebody doesn't list their certs, that must mean they don't hold any. So
>every once in awhile I am confronted with the Kafka-esque tragicomedy of
>somebody not liking one of my responses and then challenging me with
>something of the likes of :"Are you a CCxx?", and usually with the followup
>of "Since you're not a CCxx, and I am, that means that you're wrong and I'm
>right."
>
>WTF is up with that bullcr*p?
....And then (as we have all seen in here many times) when you clarify
that you are CCIE and actually do "trump" their cert (from their
manner of looking at it) the response is an ad hominem such as, "Well
you must be one of these 60 year old, near retiring, can't learn a new
trick, unemployed CCIEs who say that because <insert motive here>, and
therefore I don't believe you anyway!"
LOL
--Bernie
| |
| Schmuck 2002-12-30, 10:24 am |
| "afropuff" <bdtobey@charter.net> wrote in message news:<v0prfb8biaafd5@corp.supernews.com>...
> From my understanding you would only want to do that on a resume due to the
> fact that there are some n00b employers/scanners that check for CCNA or
> MCP...
I think that's the key point here.
I always have a separate "keywords" section on my resumes. There is
where I (personally) would include CCNA or MCP or something that an HR
Droid may search for.
Yes, in principal, people may search usenet for potential employees,
and at the height of the IT boom, maybe they did. But I am guessing
that at the moment this counts as "way too much work".. especially if
you can stick "CCIE Wanted" in 8 point Helvetica below the photo of
the bikini babe on page 3 of the local Rag, and have 20 unemployed
Certified Experts knocking on your door the following day.
If you know your stuff, chances are HR don't speak your language
anyway. I am an "expert"... tho not in Cisco, but Sun big iron.
Networking is something that's always interested me, and after five
years doing the same thing I want to learn something new.. hence my
ignorant posts to Usenet . The amount of time I spend posting
answers to Sun groups is zero.. because, as the CCIEs here will be
well aware... its bloody tiring to answer the same questions again and
again. Hopefully, over time, I will get to the level where I can
actually ask some interesting questions that will warrent the
involvement of those experienced here.
At the moment, Cisco is a still a hobby... and strangely enough the
small pile of routers in my house have caused my still-desired
ex-girlfriend to drop over on serveral occasions to ask me to show her
stuff. Go figure. Unix never did that for me.
CCIEs are sexy, Solaris Gurus are not. Go figure.
Matt
| |
|
|
"Schmuck" <yamahasw40@latinmail.com> wrote in message
news:24819cc3.0212300647.6c81e0ed@posting.google.com...
> "afropuff" <bdtobey@charter.net> wrote in message
news:<v0prfb8biaafd5@corp.supernews.com>...
> > From my understanding you would only want to do that on a resume due to
the
> > fact that there are some n00b employers/scanners that check for CCNA or
> > MCP...
>
> I think that's the key point here.
>
> I always have a separate "keywords" section on my resumes. There is
> where I (personally) would include CCNA or MCP or something that an HR
> Droid may search for.
>
> Yes, in principal, people may search usenet for potential employees,
> and at the height of the IT boom, maybe they did. But I am guessing
> that at the moment this counts as "way too much work".. especially if
> you can stick "CCIE Wanted" in 8 point Helvetica below the photo of
> the bikini babe on page 3 of the local Rag, and have 20 unemployed
> Certified Experts knocking on your door the following day.
>
> If you know your stuff, chances are HR don't speak your language
> anyway. I am an "expert"... tho not in Cisco, but Sun big iron.
> Networking is something that's always interested me, and after five
> years doing the same thing I want to learn something new.. hence my
> ignorant posts to Usenet . The amount of time I spend posting
> answers to Sun groups is zero.. because, as the CCIEs here will be
> well aware... its bloody tiring to answer the same questions again and
> again.
The part I hate is when people ask questions that can be answered merely by
simply browsing the documentation. For God's sake - before asking a
question, people need to RTFM.
Equally hilarious are the times when people are obviously on a consulting
gig for which they are grossly underqualified and basically want somebody to
do their job for them. Even more hilarity ensues when somebody is clearly
posing a question he saw on the CCIE written or the CCIE lab and wants
somebody to give him the answer.
>Hopefully, over time, I will get to the level where I can
> actually ask some interesting questions that will warrent the
> involvement of those experienced here.
>
> At the moment, Cisco is a still a hobby... and strangely enough the
> small pile of routers in my house have caused my still-desired
> ex-girlfriend to drop over on serveral occasions to ask me to show her
> stuff. Go figure. Unix never did that for me.
>
> CCIEs are sexy, Solaris Gurus are not. Go figure.
Strange. In my experience, what women find sexy is money, and CCIE's don't
have a whole lot of that these days.
>
> Matt
|
|
|
|
|