From: Brent D. Stewart (brent@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun May 12 2002 - 00:38:54 GMT-3
This .PRO discussion brings up an interesting point about the status of our
profession. To extend Howard's example, one can clearly distinguish between
a surgeon and a teenager that once dissected a frog. Any schmuck who can
install Quake feels entitled to a business card that says "network
engineer".
When I was an independent consultant, I called myself a "network engineer"
because that's what past employers had called me. I'll skip the long story,
but a competitor got the state board of engineering on my case because
"engineer" has a very specific legal definition, set of obligations, and
privileges. After some debate they left me alone, but I came away convinced
that we need to do something to create that kind of mantle for ourselves.
An "engineer" works within a body of knowledge and has outcomes that impact
public safety, among other tests. Starting to sound like us more every day,
neh? Engineers also have to pass rigorous industry tests. Engineers get
professional acknowledgement, have opportunities in business, and formal
responsibilities that we all want. Moving our profession in this direction
also works to counter the periodic flood of "paper certs", like CNEs or
MCSEs.
I've been banging this around for a couple years and trying to figure out
how to approach the problem. I'd appreciate anyone's thoughts on the topic.
I'm T-7 days, though, so I may not reply until I recover from the hangover.
When my self-esteem is back in place though, I'll get back to you. ;-) I
just wanted to get this out there while it was on my mind.
Despite the occasional outburst of pettiness (don't you people have to
study?), this list is a god-send. It helps get me through the tough spots
and let's me know others suffer the same Promethean fate. God bless you
all.
Brent
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Howard C. Berkowitz
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 2:21 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Will CCIEs qualify for a .pro domain name?
At 12:41 PM -0400 5/11/02, thomas larus wrote:
>And I strongly suspect that the powers-that-be would not permit a
>licensed lawyer use the .pro for his, say, computer networking
>consulting business or business selling CCNA or CCNP practice lab
>scenarios.
As I've been reading the problem on some other lists as well, the
problem is the definition, if you will, of Professional versus
professional. An Official Professional is not only certified by an
independent body, but has obligations to the profession that can
supercede the client's wishes. Knowing that I'm going to get Enron
jokes but also noting what's happening to Andersen, a CPA (US) or
Chartered Accountant must follow Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles (US at least) even if it doesn't meet the client's desires
and makes them look bad. A Registered Professional Engineer is
personally responsible if she signs off on a building that later
collapses. A physician is not obligated to prescribe drugs that the
patient demands, unless the physician agrees with the appropriateness
of the drug.
It soon gets very blurry. Commercial airline pilots are certified by
a government agency, and their license is at the discretion of that
agency. But the primary control over them is their airline. Another
complicating factor is that some definitions of "professional"
require a specific course of study.
A PhD scientist with the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, according to some
definitions, is not "professional" because he is not "certified" to
be a chemist. US (and some other countries), however, have special
immigration criteria for "nationally" or "internationally" recognized
experts and artists. One of the rules is that a Nobel Prize
automatically gets you a visa. But you'll note this is not a
"professional" category.
A class of generally accepted "professionals," physicians, often
can't get US visas unless they will practice in a "medically
underserved agency" which will sponsor them for a J-1 visa (I think
there are a couple of other relevant classes)
In other words, it's a mess.
I was once chatting with a very good plumber. At one point, he drew
himself up somewhat stuffily and said "anyone can run pipe, most can
thread it. Only a professional plumber can properly vent."
>
>It really is ridiculous. Most network engineers do a lot more good
>and a lot less harm than many lawyers do.
That's even in question? Although one must wonder if a network
engineer for a law firm allows the lawyers to do harm at the speed of
light
>
>I, for one, like the idea of going home knowing that one did some
>good that day. A person who cleans homes or businesses for a living
>is someone who can definitely know that he did some good that day.
>But computer networking is fascinating.
>
>>>> "Christopher Jarosz" <cajarosz@attbi.com> 05/11/02 03:32 AM >>>
>I personally like the .god domain.......
As was cited in an earlier post,the difference between God and a CCIE
is God doesn't think he's a CCIE. (OK, it was originally about
physicians).
>
>chrisj
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Antonio Marfil" <tony.marfil@networxcorp.com>
>To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 9:55 PM
>Subject: OT: Will CCIEs qualify for a .pro domain name?
>
>
>> This should be of interest:
>> http://www.msnbc.com/news/750722.asp
>>
>> Is anyone lobbying for CCIEs to qualify for a .pro address? To the
other
>> CCIEs either with numbers or soon to be, would you guys be interested in
>> qualifying for a .pro domain? Under the current standard it doesn't
look
>> like we qualify. This is ironic considering that we network engineers
are
>> the ones that keep the IT infrastructure that makes this all possible
> > running smoothly. Any thoughts or comments?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:58:55 GMT-3