From: joshua lauer (jslauer@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Oct 10 2007 - 16:23:09 ART
the NDA protects the program and yes they can do ANYTHING they want with the
certifications, including take them away. You can sue all you want, however
Cisco owns the trademark to CCIE, CCNP, etc...and they can deny you use of
that trademark at any time with either a real (or percieved) violation of
their terms. a lawsuit would be an exercise in futility, assuming it actually
made it to court. The "realistic" last resort would be to appeal the case via
Cisco.
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:30:13 -0700
> From: darklordrouter@gmail.com
> To: pauld@marshallcomm.com
> Subject: Re: OT Re: !!!! Banned by Cisco !!!! [7:126999]
> CC: smorris@ipexpert.com; darbyweaver@yahoo.com; cisco@groupstudy.com;
ccielab@groupstudy.com
>
> Even if the NDA is there to protect the program, that does not allow them
> to dodge a civil lawsuit. It does not matter that cisco owns the program.
> Snatching someones certifications away takes away significantly their
> ability to earn a living in the networking field. Yep, there are lots of
> uncertified schmoes working out there, but they are the exceptions. Try
> applying for a new job without knowing someone on the inside if you do not
> have certifications. If I did not cheat, I would appeal. If that failed,
sue
> em.
>
> DR
>
> On 10/10/07, darth router <darklordrouter@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Scott really gave himself away with the 20 sided dice thing. :P
> >
> > DR
> >
> > :)
> >
> > On 10/10/07, Paul Dardinski < pauld@marshallcomm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > To be honest, the entire thing really doesn't make sense. A piece of
> > > paper with an acl on it? Ur telling me someone actually snuck in an acl
> > > and couldn't memorize it assuming somehow they were cheating?
> > >
> > > No, there is more to the story either way. I wouldn't imagine Cisco
> > > would arbitrarily just go off and permanently remove someone unless it
> > > was justified. I would assume there is some kind of appeals process,
but
> > >
> > > again, I'd guess there is just more to this story then we are being
> > > told.
> > >
> > > PD (#16842)
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto: nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> > > Scott Morris
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 9:23 AM
> > > To: 'Darby Weaver'; cisco@groupstudy.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > 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
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________________________________
> > > 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