I agree with Priscilla. From an academic point of view it is a
valuable learning experience for beginning students (I always
recommend groupstudy to my new students). It is a unique
educational resource. It provides them with an insight into
the types of problems they might run into in the "real" world.
They also get to see some of the thinking process that goes
into arriving at a solution.
I even think the "flames" are sometimes useful. They show
how and to what degree someone must be prepared to defend
a position.
Having owned a consulting business for 10 years, I can certainly
empathize with Don's position. However, I don't think any working
consultants are losing revenue from the people who post "my boss
wants...." type of questions. The more egregious posts should
probably just be met with a loud, resounding silence. The rest
can provide an opportunity to learn in areas we might not otherwise
see.
Priscilla (I think it was you), that search engine link you were looking
for is: http://www.copernic.com. Beware though, it takes about a
dozen clicks before they finally let you download the free software.
HTH,
Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI
Community College of Southern Nevada
Cisco Regional Networking Academy
Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
I vote for keeping the real-world questions about design and
troubleshooting in the list. The answers do not compete with the
answers
someone would get from a paid consultant. They are "off the cuff"
answers
that are useful for learning, but not very detailed.
These work-related questions are the most interesting and the best
for
learning. They are a heck of a lot better than the questions about
passing
scores, availability of brain d*mps, which of the following is the
right
answer for this question, with so many typos that one can't help
think that
the person is writing it from their Palm Pilot after leaving the test
center and failing miserably due to utter cluelessness.
Priscilla
At 02:31 PM 8/20/01, Chuck Larrieu wrote:
>Not that I disagree, Don, but this has been a source of annoyance
for many
>folks for as long as I've been on the list ( around 2 years. )
>
>two points:
>
>1) sometimes some of these work related scenarios provide good
learning
>points
>
>2) people ask these kinds of questions on all the lists, no matter
what. The
>CCIE list would get it's fair share of this kind of question as
well.
>
>without having the list 100% moderated, with all messages being
reviewed,
>there is no practical way to stop this. and sometimes there is
something to
>be learned that is applicable to one's studies.
>
>Chuck
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
Of
>Donald B Johnson jr
>Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 9:09 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Associate and Professional Email Lists [7:16217]
>
>
>I think that if there is a split, all these questions concerning
work should
>be split out. It is supposed to be about group study not group
consulting.
>Over the time that I have been here there seems to be a growing
number of
>narrowly worded questions to bail someone out at work, and this
individual
>doesn't even seem to consult CCO most of the time, even though they
are
>supporting a Cisco platform. The culture here seems to support and
highly
>respect the intellectual property of others, which I whole-heartedly
agree,
>but it shows a lack of respect for those who consult for a living. I
>personally like giving "so called flames" to people who are looking
for free
>consulting work to hide there apparent laziness. Just like everyone
chimes
>in when someone comes here and tries to sell certzone labs gets
blasted. I
>wish that blatant " my boss wants me to set up a central frame hub
and six
>spoke network what should I do" should get blasted or pointed to
place where
>people can consult for food. Paul any e-mail that has boss in it
should get
>an automated stock reply, check CCO, call cisco, buy gear, have
cisco SE set
>it up, have a nice day. Now I know people are going to say that this
is how
>they learn by posting real world questions and this is true but it
is the
>blatant ones that I am talking about. Oh and keep this in mind that
the
>people answering the these so called learning experiences didn't
just know
>the answer, at some point they had to check CCO, contact Cisco, buy
gear,
>work with Cisco SE, have a nice day.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Priscilla Oppenheimer"
>To:
>Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 7:40 PM
>Subject: Re: Associate and Professional Email Lists [7:16217]
>
>
> > When I go on vaction I unsubscribe and then subscribe again.
Would all my
> > messages go in the moderator's queue when I subscribed again?
That would
>be
> > annoying for the moderator (and for me. ;-) Other than that, I
think it's
>a
> > good idea to have messages from a new subscriber go through the
moderator
> > for a while. As I'm sure you have considered, it's not a very
"scalable"
> > idea, though.
> >
> > I hope you don't divide the group again. The general networking
questions
> > are helpful to those studying for CCNP and CCDP. The diversity of
messages
> > (except for the flames, of course) are good for learning and
represent
the
> > real world better than if we just got questions about passing
scores,
etc.
> >
> > Thanks again for all you do for us!
> >
> > Priscilla
> >
> > At 12:02 PM 8/17/01, Paul Borghese wrote:
> > >With an open group, you are going to have your share of noise.
>Everyone's
> > >ides of noise is different. For example, to many this very
e-mail is
>noise
> > >because it is not directly on subject.
> > >
> > >But there are some things we can do to help lessen the noise.
They are
>on
> > >my to-do list, just have been too busy.:
> > >
> > >1. Comprehensive FAQ - we need a new faq that can answer the
questions
>that
> > >are asked over and over again.
> > >
> > >2. Split out the professional group from the general networking
group.
> > >
> > >3. Setup a system where new users can not post directly to the
group -
>This
> > >is the most difficult of the three ideas and will require
substantial
> > >coding. What I want is to have a system where when an e-mail
arrives
(or
> > >from the newsfeed or website), if the poster has not been
approved, it
>gets
> > >bounced into the moderators queue. If the moderator (actually
we will
>have
> > >many) agrees that the message is appropriate, the moderator will
allow
>the
> > >message to pass. Plus if the moderator feels that the poster
will
>continue
> > >to send interesting and valuable e-mails, the moderator can
place the
>user
> > >in the "automatic approval" category so future e-mails will not
need to
>be
> > >approved. The goal is to bounce new messages from first time
posters,
>but
> > >allow the old-timers to post without moderation. Thus filtering
the new
> > >user asking inappropriate questions and the occasional spam.
> > >
> > >Take care,
> > >
> > >Paul
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "John Neiberger"
> > >To:
> > >Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 6:05 PM
> > >Subject: Re: Associate and Professional Email Lists [7:16217]
> > >
> > >
> > > > Yes, Paul did do a good job cutting down that traffic. I
just
noticed
> > > > that in the last month or so there has been a slew of
*really* basic
> > > > questions that can be answered in the first two or three
chapters of
>any
> > > > decent CCNA study guide or by a 30 second search on CCO.
> > > >
> > > > I certainly don't mind answering these types of questions, I
was just
> > > > concerned that the purpose of the two separate lists was
being
> > > > undermined, causing a lot of unnecessary traffic. To me it's
no
> > > > different than posting jobs on the Associate or Professional
lists.
>It
> > > > may reach some of the right people, but it's not the
appropriate
place
> > > > to post that type of information.
> > > >
> > > > >>> "Tom Lisa" 8/15/01 3:19:55 PM >>>
> > > > Yes, John, there is an Associate list. We have a similar
problem
> > > > there as well. People keep insisting on asking CCNP/CCIE
level
> > > > questions on that list.
> > > >
> > > > However, people being the way they are, I doubt we will ever
> > > > solve the problem completely. But, you got to admit that
Paul
> > > > at least cut down on the volume of CCNA level traffic on this
list.
> > > >
> > > > Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI
> > > > Community College of Southern Nevada
> > > > Cisco Regional Networking Academy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > John Neiberger wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Excuse me for this rant. I'm not trying to be the content
cop, I
> > > > just
> > > > wanted to make an observation.
> > > >
> > > > Do we no longer have an Associate list as well as the
Professional
> > > > list? We've been getting horrendous numbers of emails
lately that
> > > > simply do not belong on this list. If you don't know how
to
connect
> > > > a
> > > > PC to a router using the console cable or how to connect
two
routers
> > > > back-to-back, it seems to me that you should ask those
types of
> > > > questions on the CCNA-level list, not the CCNP-level list.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not intending to come down too hard on people asking
these
> > > > questions, I'm just asking that you post to the appropriate
list.
> > > > The
> > > > Associate mailing list is intended for the simpler
questions, while
> > > > the
> > > > Professional list is intended for those with slighly more
advanced
> > > > questions. I understand that we tend to grant a *lot* of
leeway
> > > > when
> > > > it
> > > > comes to subject matter, but the level of the question
should still
> > > > be
> > > > appropriate to the list it's posted to.
> > > >
> > > > Okay, enough ranting. :-) Back to our regular
programming....
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > John
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > ________________________
> >
> > Priscilla Oppenheimer
> > http://www.priscilla.com
________________________
Priscilla Oppenheimer
http://www.priscilla.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=16598&t=16217
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
