OT: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-28 Thread Chuck's Long Road
Check this out" http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/625/ccie/ccie_program/fcpa.html AND http://www.fieldcertification.org AND http://www.fieldcertification.org/Membership/Pre_Qualification.htm Now you can get a certification that certifies that you are certified!!! -- www.chuckslongroad.inf

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-28 Thread Steven A. Ridder
Not sure I saw any new certifications, just a new org. to certify ""Chuck's Long Road"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Check this out" > > > http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/625/ccie/ccie_program/fcpa.html > > AND > > http://www.fieldcertification.org > > AND > >

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-28 Thread Chuck's Long Road
check further into the site: http://www.fieldcertification.org/Field_Certification.htm read all about "field certification" also http://www.fieldcertification.org/How_It_Works.htm sure looks like a whole new level of certification to me. not that I disagree with the principal here. But the h

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-28 Thread Steven A. Ridder
I guess you are correct. I wonder if it will ever take off. ""Chuck's Long Road"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > check further into the site: > > http://www.fieldcertification.org/Field_Certification.htm > > read all about "field certification" > > also > > htt

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-28 Thread Howard C. Berkowitz
>check further into the site: > >http://www.fieldcertification.org/Field_Certification.htm > >read all about "field certification" > >also > >http://www.fieldcertification.org/How_It_Works.htm > >sure looks like a whole new level of certification to me. > >not that I disagree with the principal he

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-28 Thread Chuck's Long Road
""Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > >check further into the site: > > > >http://www.fieldcertification.org/Field_Certification.htm > > > >read all about "field certification" > > > >also > > > >http://www.fieldcertification.org/How_It_Works.htm

RE: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-28 Thread Vicuna, Mark
it always gets back to the chicken somehow >-Original Message- >From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Sunday, 29 September 2002 09:49 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications [7:54435] > > >>check furth

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-28 Thread Kevin Wigle
dustry acceptance. In this regard, the FCPA seems to have attracted participation from a lot of the industry's top vendors so maybe the time is right for performance based testing. Kevin Wigle ----- Original Message - From: "Chuck's Long Road" To: Sent: Satur

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-28 Thread Chuck's Long Road
> > > I think I like what FCPA wants to accomplish but the devil is always in the > details and whether yet another certification will gain industry acceptance. > > In this regard, the FCPA seems to have attracted participation from a lot of > the industry's top vendors

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-28 Thread Robert Edmonds
y-pound weight > or, > > the test taker could prove this ability merely by being asked to lift an > > eighty-pound weight. Mr. Brown believed the FCPA. effort is attempting to > > have technology workers prove themselves by "lifting eighty pound > weights."

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-29 Thread Kevin Cullimore
inline - Original Message - From: "Robert Edmonds" To: Sent: 29 September 2002 12:00 am Subject: Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435] > I don't think it's accurate to say that Cisco, Microsoft and Novell have > contributed to the "pap

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-29 Thread Robert Edmonds
Message - > From: "Robert Edmonds" > To: > Sent: 29 September 2002 12:00 am > Subject: Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications [7:54435] > > > > I don't think it's accurate to say that Cisco, Microsoft and Novell have > > contributed to t

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-29 Thread Howard C. Berkowitz
At 5:04 PM + 9/29/02, Robert Edmonds wrote: >Here's another benefit I see from certifications like this: there are >things that all of us know how to do, but if asked to walk someone through >it over the phone, couldn't do it. For example, for me it would be DNS >configuration. I can do it,

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-30 Thread bi.s
[snip] >>work, but I may not be able to answer the question correctly on paper. And, >>in my opinion, it's more important to be able to "walk the walk" than "talk >>the talk". What do you think? > > > You make some excellent points. I think it's more than a binary "talk > the talk" vs. "walk

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-30 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
:-) Priscilla > ""Kevin Cullimore"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > inline > > - Original Message - > > From: "Robert Edmonds" > > To: > > Sent: 29 September 2002 12:00

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-30 Thread Howard C. Berkowitz
>Robert Edmonds wrote: >> >> Here's another benefit I see from certifications like this: >> there are >> things that all of us know how to do, but if asked to walk >> someone through >> it over the phone, couldn't do it. For example, for me it >> would be DNS >> configuration. I can do it

Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435]

2002-09-30 Thread Priscilla Oppenheimer
Howard C. Berkowitz wrote: > > >Robert Edmonds wrote: > >> > >> Here's another benefit I see from certifications like this: > >> there are > >> things that all of us know how to do, but if asked to walk > >> someone through > >> it over the phone, couldn't do it. For example, for me it > >>