-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 7/14/2020 12:15 PM, Bryan Smith wrote: > So, I'm trying to 'wrap my head around' all of this, since there > seems to be several discussions that are happening outside this > list as well. E.g., some responses/threads possibly including > 'bosses' of posters or 'training partners' outside of LPI that are > looking for answers (and not made to the list?). > > > o EXECUTIVE SUMMARY > > I'm going to interject myself here as a _peer_, as I usually do, > and should NEVER be taken as LPI's stance or policy on this list, > unless I state otherwise. This is just merely 100% my _experience_ > (i.e., arrogant, possibly baseless, non-humble opinion ;) ), based > on ... > > A) Being a Candidate myself under a dozen (12) vendor > credential/training technology programs since the '90s B) Working > as a Trainer of Approved Partners of Cisco, CompTIA, Microsoft and > Red Hat since 2003 C) Being on Advisory, Objective and Exam > Development of CompTIA, LPI and Red Hat Training and OPEN** > > And most of all ... > > I) Developing my own Linux Training in 2004-2005, and delivering > them, until I worked with (then employed by) Red Hat II) And, > 2005+, promising 300% to LPI Executive Director Rice, and providing > about 3% (and that's being nice to myself) > > Just to revise what has been stated ... > > 1) As Filipo stated: LPI primary focus is ensuring competent > trainers certified in what they are teach, and conduct 2) As Matt > stated: LPI is introducing formal membership ... and this is a > huge for Trainers, including PDUs! 3) When in doubt ... Volunteer! > Objectives, Free Learning Materials, etc... you help LPI ... LPI > will definitely help you! > > > o TOP POST PORTION (LONG) > > Using the 1-2-3 above, I'll start with #1 ... (COMPETENT, TRUSTED > TRAINERS) > > Basically, if you're going to do Linux training, LPI's Objectives > -- even new 'Learning Materials' -- are extensive and absolutely > public -- although not 'public domain' -- including virtually all > public development ... all I can say is, have at it! LPI is not > going to send a legal army saying, "Hey, your independent Linux > training is too close to our objectives!" Now if you start using > the Objectives and Learning Materials verbatim, outside the > copyright and licenses on them, and are otherwise are touting > yourself LPI(R)(TM) everywhere, you should know what _could_ > happen. > > I.e., if you not just create issues for LPI, but more importantly, > the people who support LPI in various ways, both fiscal and with > time and volunteering, but most of all, poor results for candidates > taking your training. Simple 'peer enforcement' applies here, as > we are LPI Certified Professionals, and we want to make sure that > has some meaning. ;) > > Understand what LPI cares about MOST -- especially when you use > LPI(R)(TM) ergo -- is that you are ... 1a) Certified on what you > are teaching, meaning you are not only a LPI recognized > professional on the material, but ... 1b) You are under the Code > of Conduct as it exists today for anyone certified (#2 Membership > will change this) In addition, as part of the current agreement ... > 1c) A letter from your employer, Training Partner, etc... that > you are delivering LPI in an official capacity > > But beyond just page ( https://www.lpi.org/programs/trainer ) ... > > LPI is really this unique non-profit in the vendor-agnostic space > that isn't making a killing on the 'cash cow' of training. No one > else is like LPI in this regard. Every other organization, even > vendor agnostic, even allegedly non-profit, has quite the > infrastructure and people getting paid. LPI's has a very small, > full time staff, far more contractors, and is utterly at the mercy > of volunteers. I spent years in and out of the IEEE, who charges > $200-500/year, who are dependent on thousands of volunteers too ... > and LPI does even more, with far less. So keep that in mind. > > Which is why LPI is really 'funded' by people who believe in LPI, > from the candidate to the Partners to the new Membership. > > > Hence #2 ... (INDIVIDUAL MEMBERSHIP, PDUs, etc...) > > Being that anything I say about Membership could be taken as a > 'promise,' I will not say anything except than JOIN TODAY! ( > https://people.lpi.org/ -- you'll need your candidate login > information ) > > Now I'm one of those people who will fund LPI in any avenue, > because I know how much they stretch every cent they get. Not > everyone is like that, so let's put that aside. Why is LPI > introducing membership? Here's my view ... > > 2a) LPI is focusing on INDIVIDUAL Membership first and foremost, > because this is the area really neglected by other orgs 2b) LPI is > focused on building an individual, PEER LED, avenues, including > References, Training, which brings me too ... 2c) PDUs are coming, > so you don't have to retake exams, or LPI exams, or LPI Training > ... other training, exams, etc... > > Simply put, the new PDU avenue is going to be great for Trainers! > Even more so for LPI Members, Volunteers and Partners. You won't > be limited to just LPI either. That's what's so beautiful about > what's coming. LPI is really trying to take everything everyone has > been complaining about and finally addressing it. Other > non-profits getting rid of individual membership. Other > certification programs being so silo'd. Since LPI itself has never > been about making money on Training, but serving the INDIVIDUAL > candidates, this is where it has always belonged. > > Because unlike any other organization I've been involved with, > Trainers and Re-certification hasn't been about money with LPI or, > in the case of for-profit vendor programs, pushing competent > product experts ... it's about PEERS, like you and I, helping one > another, looking out for one another. So the Training and PDUs and > other things aren't going to be about LPI, but what we PEERS want. > ;) > > > Hence #3 ... (VOLUNTEER!) > > Just like most things in Open Source, like many technical > organizations, Volunteering is important. LPI has been around 21 > years now, and it's amazing given all of the changes, even various > issues, in the space. LPI is still extremely trusted over many > other organizations in the certification space, and that's why much > of the industry is looking to LPI for the future. I cannot > emphasize this enough, it always happens whenever there's a void > ... people look to LPI because of this history. > > Objective development, especially on this list, as well as the > Wiki, has been the longest running avenue. But as a Trainer, get > involved with the creation of Learning Materials ( > https://learning.lpi.org/en/learning-materials/learning-materials/ > ). ED Matt, along with Exam DevGuru Fabian and Dr. Wirtz has really > made the Learning Materials one of the best things about LPI. > These are materials for every candidate to use, as well as Trainers > to value-add to. > > Can you imagine your materials going into everyone else's Training > with your being recognized and attributes to the greater human > knowledge? ( https://learning.lpi.org/en/about/lm-contributors/ ) > It's so easy! At the same time, you can gain access to those > materials and value add into your own. And with the new Membership > program and PDUs, you're set. I mean, if I'm an LPI Candidate -- > let alone a corporation (e.g., 'I'm thinking of something blue ..." > ;) ) -- I want to support the people 'building' LPI. > > LPI is your avenue, and Volunteering is the best way to get 10x > the return as a Trainer than what you put in. LPI has had Trainers > for decades who can attest to this, from materials to on-line > learning environments to other solutions, many working together. > > > o BOTTOM POST PORTION (QUOTE-RESPONSE) > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 1:36 PM Sabri Boukari > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > i found this for you: https://people.lpi.org/ > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 7:29 PM Maik Wienströer > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > > Hey, any Updates would be great for me :-). > > > Sabri -- > > Can you tell me what discussion/thread this was in? Was this > internal? Or people asking off-list? > > As a PEER, I think we're all fine with you helping people, but > just understand there may be some confusion, and we want to avoid > that. E.g., you sent the link for Candidate login and new > Membership request, which might not be the best. > > And prior ... > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 6:45 AM Sabri Boukari > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> I think you can start by send an email to this address ( > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>). > > This is really the e-Mail for Ethics questions, and other uses. > Probably not the avenue for Training questions. > > Matt provided information here ... > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 6:02 PM G. Matthew Rice <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> I'd like to add that the trainer program currently >> (non-exclusively) > ties trainers to training >> partners since they're the ones vouching for them. Now that the >> governance transition is complete and the membership > program is officially >> launched (surprise <https://lpi.org/membership> :)), we're adding >> an > Approved Trainer "level" which is more formal, >> between LPI and the member/trainer, and focused on their needs. >> If anyone wants more information on this, keep an eye on the >> https://lpi.org/programs/trainer page or send me an email. If > everyone wants more >> information, I can post updates here, too. > > And Filipo had a great 'summary' of everything as-is, > pre-Memebership (which is still valid, separate from Membership, > for now) ... > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 9:09 AM Monsenhor Filipo > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> Hi Piyush. you may be a training partner, did you see the >> requirements > at LPI? >> https://www.lpi.org/programs/trainer > > * Linux Professional Institute credential > <https://lpi.org/certifications> for which you are teaching * > Agreement to Code of Conduct <https://www.lpi.org/conduct> * > Reference letter/confirmation of employment from employer or > client > >> Don't hesitate to ask for help. What are you intending to teach? > > Let's try keep the the focus on the OP ... (yeah, I know, I went > all over the place too ;) ) > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 10:48 AM Piyush Kumar > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > MAY I KOW IF I CAN BECOME A TRAINER ON LPI ? WHAT IS THE > PROCEDURE? > > > - bjs Speaking ONLY as a PEER > > **SIDE STORY: I, quite infamously, named Red Hat's Open Partner > Enablement Network (OPEN) due to a fellow, long-term Red Hat > associate (a VP with a similarly low Red Hat employee number like > myself) just taking any random comment of mine I made 'in passing' > and pushing it as Corporate Branding/Marketing (oh boy, never lived > that one down with everyone else). > > > > OH GAWD! First off, Thank you Bryan. Nice try and I appreciate it. Second, the amount of work you put into assembling this email, from those who are serial Top-Posters, commingled with those professionals who respect list netiquette by those who post in-line (Bottom-Post, if you will), and in context with a conversational thread... is astounding. Astounding not just because of the level of editorial prowess you had to harness in that endeavor, but because this list is *supposed* to be comprised of Linux Open Source professionals, yet so many have just recently demonstrated such unprofessional, discourteous, and other behavior detrimental to the well-being and harmony of a listserv such as this. Fortunately, I've been following this thread as it continued to emerge so I was able to, for the most part, follow the conversation - no thanks to the very unprofessional professionals that insisted on being so rude to the rest of us who would have liked to. There is a modicum of respect for those who know they should be able to open the latest email of a thread, chronologiclly, and glean all of the information in that message, *in context*. You had to section out your email by marking the sections as Top-Posted and provide your own additional background for the sake of context and then the same thing for those who posted (properly) in-line. I apologize, on behalf of those professionals here who fail to grasp the gravity of the disruption resulting from their very unprofessional practices, and I don't care that they didn't ask me to. Jesus didn't ask if the Romans wanted to be forgiven either. Even gmail's web based front end doesn't prevent anyone from properly "Bottom-Posting" in-line, and thereby preserving the context and assisting those who would really like to follow a thread without trying to figure out where and when they should be trying to scroll up and down and up and down. That's all I'll say about this at this time, and I have no response to any replies regarding it. SMH! - -- Bradley D. Thornton Manager Network Services http://NorthTech.US TEL: +1.310.421.8268 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Find this cert at hkps://keys.openpgp.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - https://www.enigmail.net/ iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENWT7St9Eg6sLyiLAuIw5wQytyEkFAl8OOFwACgkQuIw5wQyt yEkzaAf+LPGFeVRbBEi+OmPYvmcZ7C+Ku9czxuEeOahCOwRrrfZ8lHKoI9A8wHLV 7vYWKCzFLByuq/1sAq0S76abVgO3nlUDfbrGlO2XQU76WRVmtPh57OOyhCuetkSG O/hJ3FP0nyzjpDNSTw43WlDAovnlcrchMkr6863iVRbTsysT5RG3EuvwI5ocLBc4 OBFAQWy52tVsKqYwLNPm+dO64nycm/0dXUSuLRtMa2Zn1ud6asWh/EeZy7fTueVt 3YnoI5+kHL2NQ+7/hr3Ky9jD0n2otEf1cch5g6Dpo44ndHjPVNjTafNCYY4xKqIL dpRXd64gvyn6xe3k30AgzgaLAXdG2w== =0jwB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] https://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
