From: Gary Duncanson (gary.duncanson@googlemail.com)
Date: Wed Oct 10 2007 - 11:18:14 ART
Man. I haven't used 20 sided dice since I played AD&D and wrote my own
dungeon campaigns in 1983.
By the way, anyone with an 18th level Magic User cheated.
Sorry..offtopic I know.
Gary
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Morris" <smorris@ipexpert.com>
To: "'Darby Weaver'" <darbyweaver@yahoo.com>; <cisco@groupstudy.com>;
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 2:22 PM
Subject: RE: OT Re: !!!! Banned by Cisco !!!! [7:126999]
> There are always options, not necessarily appeals. Like you point out,
> Cisco is not a government entity, and we are not required to have any
> particular rights. We are making one of several choices to voluntarily
> participate in this program as well as signing the NDA as well as agreeing
> to the terms and conditions set out in the program.
>
> Just like any problem that cannot be solved at the lowest level, if one
> feels something is wrong in their case (not a Ralph Nader-type approach
> for
> consumer rights), then go up the food chain. Everyone has bosses. Now, I
> would not recommend sending John Chambers an e-mail, but if this person
> has
> done wrong and has a relationship with a local Cisco SE, I'm sure they can
> figure out someone in the food chain who would be appropriate to strike up
> a
> conversation with at a professional level.
>
> On the other hand, especially being in the USA, I'm sure you've seen the
> TV
> show COPS. If you try to handle yourself unprofessionally, don't expect a
> professional response. But either way, it's not OUR place. The rules are
> set out pretty clear, that's all that Cisco is required to disclose to us.
> We know them, don't violate them and there won't be a problem.
>
> Would it make you feel better if someone from Cisco came out and said that
> there was no appeals process, that they actually used a 20-sided dice to
> figure out someone's fate? What would you do then? While it may seem
> amusing (at least if you haven't broken any rules), the idea of our being
> involved in the process is still the same. We are not.
>
> Sure, we can speak our minds if we want, but this is not a democratic
> process. When policies change, we have to deal with those as well. A
> couple of years ago when they changed the recertification process, I
> actually got screwed out of three years of recert. But there wasn't much
> to
> do about it. I suppose I could have decided to forego the entire program
> in
> protest, but other than people looking at me funny, what would it have
> accomplished?
>
> If you have political rights, by all means exercise them. But that's
> government. This is business. Short of Cisco violating some rule of law
> (and no, due process is not guaranteed in instances like these) there's
> not
> much to do. A civil lawsuit can always be filed, but I can imagine that's
> really not the best way to win friends and influence people. :)
>
> Somehow I'm thinking the "all for one and one for all" mentality will
> watch
> you chasing things on your on Don Quixote. (and yes, I know those are two
> completely different stories)
>
> For your movie analogy, are you talking about "V for Vendetta" or the "V"
> in
> which people eat rats?
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Darby Weaver [mailto:darbyweaver@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 8:56 AM
> To: smorris@ipexpert.com; cisco@groupstudy.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: OT Re: !!!! Banned by Cisco !!!! [7:126999]
>
> The real question is if anyone of us stands accused, what rights, if any,
> do
> we have as customers.
>
> If the guy is guilty, then so be it, don't do the crime if you can't do
> the
> time.
>
> However, if a person is innocent, then what?
>
> Quietly get dragged to the gallows... to be summarily charged and swiftly
> executed, never to be heard from again.
>
> Reminds me of a scene in the movie "V".
>
> As long as one person is denied, we are all denied, one and all.
>
> Now if we have no rights, or rights to any review of any sort, that's
> fine.
>
>
> Let's just be clear about it, up front, and open.
>
> No harm in that.
>
> If an appeal is not for us to know about, exactly who else should know
> about
> it?
>
> We are the a large community of Cisco CCIE people and we are directly
> affected by any policy or lack theereof, that the Cisco CCIE program may
> wish, at their sole discretion, afford us.
>
> From the way the letter reads, I get the feeling the appeals are over and
> so
> was the process. There are reasons why the "note" was not disclosed for
> obvious reasons. The program lives and dies by the NDA. No argument.
>
> However, if a person stands accused, at least in my country, the USA, a
> person is usually allowed to face his accuser.
>
> Now Cisco is not a country and is a private entity,, no doubt about it,
> Cisco is not bound by this.
>
> But again what can a person who believes himself/herself innocent and free
> from all doubt do?
>
> You mentioned there are always appeals...
>
> Exactly, what are they?
>
> I, for one, have never seen such a process published.
> Now, to be fair, Cisco may not have one, want one, or perceive the need to
> ever have one. Fine.
>
> Let's just clear the air and say it as such, one way or the other.
>
> This forum is just a means of communications and this ia a very important
> matter - you should see the number of relative posts and this little issue
> has created.
>
> I believe the CCIE Community does care and if there is a process, then
> they
> aka "us" would probably like to know it.
>
> There are step-by-step processes on how to open an email on the
> Internet...
>
>
> Why not how to appeal a process, that stands to risk a lot of our
> hard-earned money, time, and reputation is even remotely falsely accused.
>
>
> So, is there a process?
>
> 1. Yes
> 2. No
>
> If so, what is it? If not, then as long as it is stated and understood to
> be so, and we are all clear on the matter. Great.
>
> However, I would have thought there was no process.
> But now I am inclined to beleive their may be one.
>
> What is it?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- Scott Morris <smorris@ipexpert.com> wrote:
>
>> I think the point Chris is making is that it seems to be something
>> between Hitesh and Cisco. If you fight hard enough, there are always
>> appeals processes, but that is something that's up to him to pursue
>> and not for us to debate.
>>
>> We can all get fired up about it and decide how unfair life is, and
>> perhaps after reading the thread below decide that Hitesh is being
>> wronged by someone lying and has no recourse, but the bottom line is
>> that other than the e-mail presented to us we have absolutely no idea
>> what did or did not happen there.
>>
>> While I think it is great that Cisco takes all these things very
>> seriously, and has some fairly serious repercussions for those who
>> violate the rules of conduct (that we all sign in agreement to), I
>> also know that they take their investigations fairly seriously and are
>> not just going to jump in with that harsh of a punishment if it were
>> not warranted.
>>
>> While Cisco cares about what we think, it is not their policy to
>> involve the general public in an internal security matter. We do not
>> get to be a jury of Hitesh's peers. If he wants that sort of
>> consideration, then there are always civil legal remedies which he
>> could pursue.
>>
>> Why should we be asking how arbitrary the process is? It's kinda like
>> asking how arbitary the grading process is. Did the proctor not like
>> the way my hair was combed that day, or did I not smile enough or say
>> "Good Morning" fast enough?
>>
>> If we all spend time worrying about things that:
>>
>> 1. We can't possibly know or assume anyway 2. We can't possibly
>> control either 3. We can't know whether it's simply our cosmic karma
>> instead of Cisco's policy anyway
>>
>> Then we're just going to get stressed out for no particular reason.
>> Concentrate on the studying, take the test, be professional, and life
>> will be good. If anyone here individually becomes involved with
>> something like outlined below, THEN they obviously have a right to be
>> upset/concerned/whatever and then they will truly know the facts
>> involved with it. Until then, we are all simply bystanders in the
>> game and seeing one (potentially jilted) side of the story.
>>
>> I've been around the CCIE program, and know many of the people
>> involved, and I can assure you that I have no reason to believe there
>> is any arbitrary treatment of situations like this occurring.
>>
>> Just my thoughts...
>>
>>
>> Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service
>> Provider) #4713, JNCIE-M
>> #153, CISSP, et al.
>> CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-ER
>> VP - Technical Training - IPexpert, Inc.
>> IPexpert Sr. Technical Instructor
>>
>> A Cisco Learning Partner - We Accept Learning Credits!
>>
>> smorris@ipexpert.com
>>
>> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
>> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
>> http://www.ipexpert.com
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nobody@groupstudy.com
>> [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Darby Weaver
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 3:02 AM
>> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com; cisco@groupstudy.com
>> Subject: OT: Re: !!!! Banned by Cisco !!!!
>> [7:126999]
>>
>> Chris,
>>
>> Contrar my friend. I have seen personally that the CCIE Developement
>> team does watch these this forum with interest and with intent.
>>
>> They do care about the program.
>>
>> They do care about what we think - we are something like a customer...
>> old fashioned concept.
>>
>>
>> Now from what I have read thus far, our friend was apparently
>> confronted about this incident in the lab.
>> As was at least one other person. So the proctor had his reasons no
>> doubt for thinking as he did.
>>
>> This is very serious and could affect the way we enter the lab exam in
>> the future.
>>
>> Apparently a "note" or "notes" were found and those notes were "not on
>> the paper given by the proctors".
>>
>> Now if our friend here is innocent and did not bring notes to the lab,
>> that is one thing.
>>
>> If he he did, then it is another.
>>
>> The problem is what can a person do if he/she did not bring notes but
>> were accused of doing so?
>>
>>
>> There really is very little recourse.
>>
>> However, we as CCIE candidates want to believe in the integrity of the
>> program as a whole and in our proctors.
>>
>> I, for one, have always found the proctors to be very professional and
>> very helpful.
>>
>> This person is concerned about his career and should be, since this is
>> a serious offense.
>>
>> Cisco is concerned about the integrity of the entire CCIE program, as
>> we all should be.
>>
>> From the treads I've read up to know, and I've seen the email chain,
>> the Cisco Security Team probably have a strong case and it seems they
>> took a little while to properly weigh the options.
>>
>> Banning someone for life and stripping all certs is pretty serious.
>>
>> The question we all should be asking is "how arbitrary is the
>> process"?
>>
>> Even if a student is expelled for cheating from a College Campus, they
>> still have some rights.
>>
>> Cisco makes their case clear - break the rules and you are banned for
>> life - per the lastest CCIE update.
>>
>> It is their program, but it is also ours. We all have significant
>> investments in time and money too.
>>
>> The vendors here have incredible amounts invested.
>>
>> Everyone who takes the time and commits the effort has a lot invested.
>>
>>
>> While we do not want to give cheaters any breaks, we still should want
>> a fair process.
>>
>> However, I still think the CCIE Proctors would never risk their
>> integrity or career on making such a mistake and the situation is
>> probably well-founded.
>>
>> Remember, what are the odds that 4 people taking the lab have the same
>> lab or even are taking the same track for that matter.
>>
>> So...
>>
>> Just sitting around not sleeping and decided to chime in.
>>
>> All any of has is an opinion.
>>
>> Since only a few people were there, only those folks know the facts.
>>
>>
>>
>> --- Chris Tevlin <nobody@groupstudy.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hitesh,
>> >
>> > I'm unclear what you hope to gain by posting
>> this thread here. It
>> > seems to me that there isn't any member of this
>> study group that can
>> > directly influence the decision made by Cisco
>> Systems. Under the
>> > circumstances, I find the practice of posting your
>> dialog with Cisco a
>> > bit distasteful. You are certainly free to post
>> what you'd like, but
>> > know that public opinion is a double-edged sword;
>> you may not achieve
>> > much sympathy. If you truly feel that you have
>> been unfairly accused,
>> > you must appeal to the decision authority
>> directly. Keep in mind that
>> > your conduct inside the exam is what has been
>> called into question,
>> > but your conduct outside of the exam is also
>> likely to matter if any
>> > further consideration is undertaken by Cisco.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Chris
>> >
>> >
>> > ""Hitesh Panchani"" wrote in message
>> > news:200710091607.l99G7jHU002598@groupstudy.com...
>> > > sad.gif
>> > > BANNED BY CISCO
>> > > sad.gif
>> > >
>> > > I was told by forum in Sadikhov to post my
>> problem
>> > here.
>> > >
>> > > I did CCIE lab exam and not receiving result
>> with
>> > in 48 hr so I contact
>> > > Cisco support desk. They told me I didn't done
>> lab
>> > yet. I told them this
>> > > is
>> > > my 3rd attempt for lab and I couldnb?Tt receive
>> my
>> > result yet. It is more
>> > > then 48hr and I couldnb?Tt receive my result and
>> I
>> > couldnb?Tt open my CCIE
>> > > login. Cisco did open my case cert case. Told by
>> > helpdesk some one will
>> > > contact in 48hr but still no contact in 48hr so
>> I
>> > did contact Cisco again
>> > > they said there is database have problem your
>> case
>> > is passed to IT staff
>> > > and
>> > > they will take 5 working days to respond. AS
>> soon
>> > as database fix will
>> > > give
>> > > you update. After 5 days they didn't contact so
>> I
>> > made contact again and
>> > > helpdesk told me Head of IT is dealing with your
>> > case and it took 7 days
>> > > to
>> > > investigate why database is missing. I made
>> > contact after 7days then Cisco
>> > > helpdesk says your case is in security officer
>> > they will contact in 10
>> > > day.
>> > > So we are closing your case now and you have to
>> > wait for security team
>> > > response they will send you mail or letter. I
>> > received mail from CISCO as
>> > > below:
>> > >
>> > > Via Federal Express and [Electronic Mail]
>> > >
>> > > Hitesh
>> > > Candidate ID 207489284
>> > > *******@hotmail.com
>> > >
>> > > Address
>> > > United Kingdom, Europe
>> > >
>> > > Re: Violation of CCIE Candidate Conduct
>> > Policy-Possession of notes during
>> > > exam
>> > >
>> > > Dear Hitesh,
>> > > I am writing to you on behalf of Cisco, Inc.
>> > (b?oCiscob? ). It has come
>> > > to
>> > > our attention that on September 9th 2007 your
>> CCIE
>> > Lab exam proctor
>> > > discovered notes regarding exam question
>> > configurations at your assigned
>> > > testing station. The proctor reported that
>> upon
>> > confronting you with
>> > > these
>> > > notes that you admitted they belonged to you.
>> As
>> > you should be aware,
>> > > possession of notes during testing is a
>> violation
>> > of the Candidate Conduct
>> > > Policy which states:
>> > >
>> > > b?oNo candidate will take any action that will
>> > compromise the integrity or
>> > > confidentiality of a Cisco Certification
>> > examination or otherwise
>> > > compromise
>> > > the integrity of the Cisco Certification
>> program.
>> > Such actions include but
>> > > are not limited to:
>> > > Using any aids, notes, equipment or other
>> > materials not authorized by the
>> > > TestingDelivery Partners or Cisco during the
>> > exam.b?
>> > >
>> > > You signed a Cisco Career Certification and
>> > Confidentiality Agreement
>> > > that
>> > > prior to your exam. To paraphrase this
>> agreement,
>> > Cisco may at its sole
>> > > discretion revoke any and all Certifications you
>> > may have earned, and
>> > > permanently ban you from earning future
>> > Certifications if Cisco
>> > > determines,
>> > > in its sole discretion, that you have undertaken
>> > or participated in any
>> > > action that compromises the integrity and
>> > confidentiality of an
>> > > examination
>> > > or the Program.
>> > >
>> > > As a result, you are hereby permanently
>> prohibited
>> > from taking any Cisco
>> > > examinations, including CCIE written and
>> > laboratory examinations, and any
>> > > Cisco certifications with VUE, Ciscob?Ts
>> > Authorized Testing Delivery
>> > > Partner. Access to your candidate records in
>> the
>> > Certifications Tracking
>> > > System is also denied.
>> > >
>> > > The intention of Cisco career certifications is
>> to
>> > ensure high standards
>> > > of
>> > > technical expertise. Achieving Cisco
>> > certificationb?"at any levelb?"means
>> > > joining the ranks of skilled network
>> professionals
>> > who have earned
>> > > recognition and respect in the industry.
>> > Maintaining the integrity of
>> > > Cisco
>> > > certification programs and ensuring that only
>> > qualified individuals
>> > > receive
>> > > certification is in the interest of everyone.
>> > >
>> > > Thank you for your cooperation.
>> > > Sincerely,
>> > > Kathe Saccenti, CCIE 2099
>> > > Mgr, Operations - Labs
>> > > Learning@Cisco.com
>> > > Cc: VQS JW
>> > >
>> > > REPLY FROM CISCO AFTER I REPLAYED TO ABOVE EMAIL
>> > >
>> > > As I stated in the letter I sent you, we reserve
>> > the right to deny
>> > > testing to individuals that violate our
>> policies.
>> > > The report and the evidence submitted,
>> correspond
>> > fully to your
>> > > configurations.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > From: Hp***** [mailto:hp*****@hotmail.com]
>> > > Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 7:16 AM
>> > > To: Kathe Saccenti (ksaccent)
>> > > Subject: Re: CCIE Notification
>> > >
>> > > Hi Kathe
>> > >
>> > > I deny any wrong doing with any cisco
>> > certification. I was called up by
>> > > the proctor after he had called the other
>> > candidate first, he presented
>> > > me with a piece of paper, said to be found on my
>> > desk. I denied it
>> > > immediately as I would be cheating with myself
>> > first. Proctor mention
>> > > there was a "access list" on that piece of
>> paper,
>> > to which I said "can I
>> > > see it" reply "no" at some point in proctor
>> > mention that "if it not
>> > > your, you do not need to worry about it", at
>> that
>> > point I left the
>> > > building. Proctor told me that somebody will
>> > contact me within 48hrs
>> > > will contact me, which never happen, that why I
>> > raised the ticket
>> > > (070911-000286)on 11 Sep 2007, not knowing what
>> > department to contact I
>> > > started the general query.
>> > >
>> > > I left my work in NOV 2006 to pursuit my long
>> term
>> > plan of obtaining the
>> > > CCIE. I have been planning to become CCIE since
>> > 2000 and gradually
>> > > getting closer to my goal (my life achievement).
>>
>> > If you look at your
>> > > records, this was my third attempt, and I was
>> > willing to one more
>> > > attempt before giving it up. The concept of
>> these
>> > labs is to understand
>> > > the technology first and later configuration
>> > command.
>> > >
>> > > I realised the importance of the standards set
>> by
>> > the CCIE
>> > > qualification. I would appreciate if you would
>> > reconsider your decision.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > >
>> > > Hitesh
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Nov 16 2007 - 13:11:13 ART