> You can be offended all you want, it does not change the FACT that > accepting a direct gift from a vendor creates an obvious problem with > basic conflict of interest rules. I don't make these rules up > all I have > stated is that a real or perceived conflict exists. If the > argument held > no water, then there would be no reason to be offended.
Prove it. And don't use the words "obvious" or "apparent" I'm paid to be a Windows Sysadmin. I'm a Microsoft MVP. Explain to me exactly how that's a conflict of interest. The reality is that you can't, because it isn't. Now, if I was selling Microsoft and Novell solutions and held my MVP status, there could be some validity to the argument that there is a *perceived* conflict of interest. There ISN'T a conflict of interest until it affects my judgement or my recommendations to a customer. Then again, MVP status is awarded for contributions to peer technical support, which has nothing to do with selling anything. -------------------------------------------------------------- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. > -----Original Message----- > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 1:10 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics > > > You can be offended all you want, it does not change the FACT that > accepting a direct gift from a vendor creates an obvious problem with > basic conflict of interest rules. I don't make these rules up > all I have > stated is that a real or perceived conflict exists. If the > argument held > no water, then there would be no reason to be offended. > > > It's not exactly a gift. It's a recognition for a > contribution pefrormed. > > There are, admittedly, strings attached, although there are > none that I > > consider to be ethical issues. > > > > I completely resent your entire assertion that I am somehow > unethical > > because I accept the title and gifts associated with being > an MVP. I will > > defend my standards of ethics against anyone's, including > your poorly > > defined and indefensible set. In fact, I was nearly fired > from my current > > job because I defended ethical behavior, but the system > worked and I am > > still here. (This was completely unrelated to anything surrounding > > Microsoft or MVP.) > > > > So, let's get back to the real argument. Please either (1) > prove how being > > an MVP is unethical, or (2) go away and let this thread > rest. I tire of > > your repeated extrapolations, digressions, and less-than-brilliant > > treatises. > > > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP > > Freelance E-Mail Philosopher > > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Greg Deckler > > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 9:51 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics > > > > The flaw here is that that "Cisco Certified" has clearly > defined things that > > must be met and requires a payment to the vendor to > achieve. You must PAY to > > get the required material. You must PAY to take the tests. > You must PAY for > > the certification. > > > > MVP is a gift. There are no explicit requirements and there > is no exchange > > of currency. > > > > This is the CLEAR difference between certifications and > gifts like MVP. > > > > > Titles based on criteria that has been successfully met, > as in MVP or > > > Cisco Certified, etc., has no ethical issues. It is an > earned title > > > that denotes an area of expertise. It is up to those who view the > > > title to determine if the criteria for getting the title > warrants a > > > level of trust and respect. > > > > > > Personal gifts from vendors that you make purchasing decisions > > > regarding is unethical. > > > > > > Rules of ethics are necessary in this business. > > > > > > Ceaselessly arguing in order to have the last word is poor use of > > > brain power, poor use of this list and poor use of ethics. Anyone > > > whose priority is to *always* win the "fight" must > sacrifice the truth > > > and good judgment, thereby violating basic ethics. > > > > > > Just another opinion :-) > > > > > > Best Regards,=20 > > > > > > Dan Bartley > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 12:24 > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics > > > > > > I got to the first paragraph in your post and pretty much quit > > > reading.=20 > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Web Interface: > > > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t ext_mode=&lang > =english > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
