From: P729 (p729@xxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Aug 08 2002 - 15:45:57 GMT-3
I would be if I were one of them. Losing their number(s) would be the least
of their concerns. The NDA opens you up to legal remedies by Cisco for
damages.
Basically the NDA limits you from revealing anything specific about the real
lab exam. If you independently came up with a rigorus learning program using
published exam guidelines, no problem. One might argue that the set of IOS
commands and solutions is finite, so there's bound to be some "coincidental"
scenarios and objectives. Well, by signing the NDA, one might want to be
prepared to defend that argument in court. Is it worth it? That's up to the
individual to decide.
My two cents.
Regards,
Mas Kato
https://ecardfile.com/id/mkato
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fanglo MA" <fangloma@pacific.net.hk>
To: "Michael Snyder" <msnyder@ldd.net>
Cc: "'lrlab'" <lrlab@swbell.net>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 5:26 AM
Subject: RE: 200 per month. Phased Locked Loop
One more interesting is: if after passing CCIE one or two years, a group
of CCIEs prepare to open business on lab-book or bootcamp. Would they
be NDA concerned? While the lab format or even the content might/might
not been changed. Any input?
Regards,
Fanglo
On Thu, 8 Aug 2002, Michael Snyder wrote:
> Sounds like a feedback loop.
>
> When the frequency of a radio signal drifts, the phased locked loop of
> the tuner will resettle to the new signal frequency.
>
> When the lab content changes, the questions in the forum changes, till
> the active members of Groupstudy resettle to study the new content.
>
>
> Is this a NDA problem? Maybe, BUT maybe not!
>
> For example, when a CCIE passes his test, then writes a studyguide a
> year later, he is using all of knowledge he has learned to write the
> studyguide. Are studyguides a NDA problem? No, because Cisco publishes
> them, therefore any content in such a guide could never be an NDA
> problem.
>
> Another example, a while back, when a new CCIE posted his pass message,
> he posted in the message that IGRP was the devil. Which I could deduce
> that the gentleman had IGRP on his exam, and it caused him great
> problems. Because of this feedback message, I broke out my books a
> reviewed IGRP.
>
> Is the above a text book example of a NDA violation? Lets think about
> it, it was already general knowledge that IGRP was on the exam. It is
> also general knowledge that IGRP is hard to work with. Third point,
> Cisco has posted a message that IGRP is being removed from the exam,
> which means that must have been there in the first place.
>
> I cite the above to reinforce my point that Groupstudy is in a phased
> locked feedback loop with the lab exam, if fact in order to help each
> other to study, it must have that relationship with the exam in order to
> be effective.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lrlab [mailto:lrlab@swbell.net]
> Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 8:34 AM
> To: syv; Michael Snyder
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: 200 per month.
>
> I agree with a few exceptions. I think as a group we are developing
> better
> sutdy practices but I also think that there is some cheating going on.
> Just
> watch the numbers. When the pass rate gets to around 100 per week the
> questions on the group are all answered for the most part and people are
> just tweeking the answers. Then out of the clear blue sky a new batch
> of
> questions start poping up, at that same time the pass number drops to 40
> -50
> per week. look at the last time that happned (july 27/28). It seems
> to be
> a trend.
>
>
> Just my 2 cents
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:48:20 GMT-3