From: Chuck Church (cchurch@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Mar 08 2002 - 21:19:49 GMT-3
As noted by others on this list, I emailed the person offline. I believed
that was the most efficient way to handle it. We all agreed to Cisco's NDA
when we signed up for this email list, and again when you take the lab. NDA
violations are handled pretty harshly by Cisco, including being banned for a
year. I don't want to see someone get banned for a year, but I'll be damned
if I'm going to stand by and watch people cheat. I put a ton of time and
money into getting my CCIE, as it was all self-financed. I don't want to
see the CCIE get devalued at all. And Robert, please get your facts
straight in the future before shooting off and looking silly. That's all I
have to say.
Chuck Church
CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE
Sr. Network Engineer
Magnacom Technologies
140 N. Rt. 303
Valley Cottage, NY 10989
845-267-4000
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Roberto Iannuzzi
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 5:36 PM
To: Ahmed Mamoor Amimi; Leonardo Pereira; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: IPX EIGRP hold-time
Not according to Chuck Church, he is the one that gets the person in trouble
by posting "watch the NDA". Even though it may be an honest question, Chuck
brings unwanted attention to the original poser of the question, hence the
slew of extra e-mails.
Had he not made this statement, the question would have gone unnoticed,
though read on as I believe this part is very important:
**Chuck Church said: "Watch the NDA" to everyone in this group which means
he thinks it is an exam question and is telling everyone it is**
Is Chuck Church a Cisco employee representing Cisco on NDA issues?
Any comments would be appreciated....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ahmed Mamoor Amimi" <mamoor@ieee.org>
To: "Roberto Iannuzzi" <twinturbos@sympatico.ca>; "Leonardo Pereira"
<lpereira@br.ibm.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: IPX EIGRP hold-time
> I think this is a normal common question.... and there is nothing in it to
> break the NDA.
>
> If i say how to configure ip address.... then this will also be breaking
NDA
> ... <g>
>
>
> -Mamoor
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Roberto Iannuzzi <twinturbos@sympatico.ca>
> To: Leonardo Pereira <lpereira@br.ibm.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 11:48 PM
> Subject: Re: IPX EIGRP hold-time
>
>
> > I agree. The only person breaking the NDA here is Chuck Church...
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Leonardo Pereira" <lpereira@br.ibm.com>
> > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 1:26 PM
> > Subject: Re: IPX EIGRP hold-time
> >
> >
> > > Sorry, but why you said "watch the NDA" ?
> > >
> > > It is a question like any other. He can be found this question in a
book
> > > scenario. But after your statement, I am quite sure that in one exam
> there
> > > is a question like that. I really don't understand why some people in
> this
> > > list don't answer some question because of NDA. I think that NDA
intend
> to
> > > prevent that someone arrive here and tell exact how is the exam (the
> > > questions and etc).
> > >
> > > But I don't see the question below as a NDA violation. Am I wrong ???
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Leonardo.
> > >
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:56:57 GMT-3