[lpi-discuss] [LPI-News] Linux Professional Institute changes Recertification Policy

Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith at ieee.org
Tue Dec 5 05:10:45 EST 2006


On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 10:11 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Some basics:
> 1. LPI was created by Linux professionals for the benefit of Linux 
> professionals.
> 2. LPI's sole and only valid purpose is to serve the needs of their 
> *members*
> 3. Members are individual people
> Note that "industry" isn't in that list.

Is this really the foundation of LPI?
It is not to serve the industry too?
Seems self-defeating if you ask me.

Then again, I'm at odds with the opinions of 97% of Linux consultants
anyway.  Then again, I do more than just web-based services, and get
dumb looks when I talk about various practices and implementations.

But I'm willing to submit to not serving industry, only members, if that
was what LPI was founded on.  I'm at odds with that view, especially
given what industry considers is important, and what I normally see on
Discuss labeled as "no one uses that," but I'll submit to it if it's the
true foundation of LPI.

> It would appear that LPI did not consult with their members on this. 
> No-one here has mentioned being consulted, or receiving an opinion poll 
> to fill in, or being invited to a discussion on recertification. 

Now I do have to agree with this, or it seems this way.
I would have liked to have at least seen it on the Alumni list.

> Considering that LPIs is answerable only to their members and to no-one 
> else, I find this most odd.

Again, is this the reality of LPI's foundation?

> Scott, I think you have just walked into a stupendous PR goof, and are 
> in danger of annoying LPI's members. How could LPI possibly have 
> considered that they could implement a deep fundamental change like 
> this without discussing it with the members first? 

Agreed, at least on the Alumni list.

> So I'll repeat what I said in my first mail in this thread: I passed a 
> series of exams and as a result LPI awarded me a cert that is valid for 
> 10 years.
> And damnit, I insist that LPI honour that agreement to the full.

Depends on how you look at it.

They are honoring it by your certification being perpetual.
But they now have an "ACTIVE/INACTIVE" status.

At what point do we value older members, but not newer ones?


-- 
Bryan J. Smith         Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org   http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------
        Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution



More information about the lpi-discuss mailing list