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

[Bryan J. Smith]

My last comments on this ...

Alan McKinnon <alan at linuxholdings.co.za> wrote:
> Except that some faceless, nameless, identity-less non-entity at
> the upper levels of LPI has now decided to change that ...
> OK, so I'm ticked off ...
> But remember that almost no-one supports LPI for purely logical
> reasons ...

Of those various, allegedly non-existent "industry" influences, I'm
sure at least some of those with the "six sisters" would strongly
disagree with you.  If you don't know who I mean, I'd have to
question if you attended any TAC and have worked with Matt or anyone
else at LPI.

> We do it because it's cool ...

Could you _please_ stop responding on-behalf of _all_ of us? 
Especially for people like myself, professionally at odds with 97% of
Linux professionals most of the time.  ;->

First rule of standards development:
  People _differ_ in what is important.  

Second rule of standards development:  
  Industry is what _makes_ products and _employs_ people.

Seen far too many IEEE standards fly because they realized rules #1
and #2 as well as tank because they didn't (especially #2).


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