(aside to Mikel: your formatting and gmail don't play nicely together...) On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:33:10 -0500, Mikel King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jerry B. Altzman wrote: > changing subject...changing thread... On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:32:18 -0500, > Mikel King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Without regard to expiration, what's the purpose of cert #1? I know it > sounds like a BS cert but for my company that uses FreeBSD for as much as > possible it would be nice to have a secretarial applicant that new the > basics, already. Therefore, I tossed that in as a nice to have cert, > certainly not a prereq for anything else, I mean you certainly could stage > these as successive prerequisite certifications. Let's face it basic > user/operator stuff rarely changes so that could have an extremely long > lifetime as far as certs go. The same goes for Jr Admin, I doubt that the > cert for that will change drastically over the course several years. Even Sr > Admin stuff the basics haven't really change too much, I am still using > texts on admin stuff that are easily 8 years old.
Why "cheapen" a cert by having something that is basically wallpaper? Is there an MS "user" cert? (I don't know.) Ask yourself: what is this *for*? What do I want to *certify*? Who would care? > The whole reason I drafted this concept was to ultimately reduce the work > load drafting up these certs. Since the first block will be slow to change > it should require the lowest amount of effort to maintain once established. > This should also in turn free up people who are say experts in security or > db stuff to maintain these fast paced areas of expertise. This could also > help to reduce the duplication of effort and overlap. Well, instead, let's think of ourselves of consumers of the certified. If someone has a 'basic' level cert, what the heck are we expecting them to know? Installation? Package management? If I came to you and said I was "Jr. BSD Admin", how much leeway would you give me? What questions should I skip in the interview? What should I expect you to know coming in right away? I'm kinda harping on the semantics of this, since precious few certs carry any real weight. (The CCIE is an exception, as are, for example, the actuarial exams and subsequent chartering). > No I don't think so, but that is some thing that would set these apart from > vendor specific certs. If the jr passes the test why not? Of course this all > depends upon how the certs are defined. I am just tossing out one scenario. I'm just tossing out a criticism of it, and making an alternative suggestion: no additional certs can be piled on a junior BSD cert. > I don't see any reason why not. When I was in the > military I held many advance certifications at a jr level. For instance an > E4 Electronics Technician could hold a Crypto Cert, that his E10 ETCS > supervisor does not. The Senior Chief is clearly a top level cert he > certainly gets paid enough, but he doesn't need to be certified on the > crypto equipment to manage those who are and work on it daily. Does it mean > that he couldn't work on said equipment if the need arose? Of course he > could, that's what tech manuals are for. Granted, but those are somewhat independent certs, no? I mean, we're talking about "advanced such-and-such ON BSD" -- there's nothing that says a Jr. BSD sysadmin couldn't also get his OCP, or CCIE, or CISSP... > -- Cheers, Mikel King Optimized Computer Solutions, INC 39 West Fourteenth //jbaltz -- jerry b. altzman [EMAIL PROTECTED] foo mane padme hum _______________________________________________ BSDcert mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/bsdcert
