From: Michael Snyder (msnyder@xxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Aug 08 2002 - 21:42:48 GMT-3
My corrected statement should be:
To: "Like I said, it amuses me that everyone thinks that all the
knowledge
that we study comes from Mt. Cisco and somehow the NDA applies an gag
order to every test subject after you take the test the first time."
Anyway, let's drop the thread, there's work to be done. I'm doing GTS
tonight, then Multicast this weekend.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
P729
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 5:16 PM
To: Michael Snyder; jay@west.net
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: 200 per month. Phase Locked Loop
Huh? How did you make the leap from: "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."
To: "Like I said, it amuses me that everyone thinks that all the
knowledge
that we study comes from Mt. Cisco and somehow the NDA applies."
Obviously, nobody has a lock on knowledge in general, but Cisco does
have a
lock on divulging what actually appears on a real exam no matter how it
was
derived. Of course you can arrive at similar tests for comprehension in
a
"clean room" fashion.
Mas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Snyder" <msnyder@ldd.net>
To: "'P729'" <p729@cox.net>; <jay@west.net>
Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:46 PM
Subject: RE: 200 per month. Phase Locked Loop
---cut---
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.
---cut---
It amuses me that the same people who think of forward and return paths
on everything they do, don't recognize those "coincidental scenarios"
travel both ways. I'm saying the new twists and turns we come up with,
will get added back into lab at an later date.
For example, student takes the lab, where the proctor expects solution
X, but student gives solution Y. Proctor never thought of solution Y.
Proctor verifies that solution Y is valid. Then somehow, the next
generation of the lab incorporates solution Y into the test.
Where did the creative work come from? The student. Anyone who has ever
taught will recognize this as a valid case.
Like I said, it amuses me that everyone thinks that all the knowledge
that we study comes from Mt. Cisco and somehow the NDA applies. Much of
our knowledge comes from the work the CCIE candidates have done and
outside third party personnel have done over the last nine years.
I'll stop posting to this thread now. I think I've made my point.
Back to studying.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
P729
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 1:46 PM
To: Fanglo MA
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: 200 per month. Phased Locked Loop
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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:48:21 GMT-3