From: Marko Milivojevic (markom@markom.info)
Date: Tue Oct 07 2008 - 10:33:34 ART
That was exactly my point... How would doing just one thing prove
anything. Furthermore, how would chess show anything? :-) Of course,
this is just knee-jerk reaction, since I'm really bad at that game :-)
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 13:28, Scott Morris
<smorris@internetworkexpert.com> wrote:
> Thought process.
>
> It one method of demonstrating analytical thinking. At least if someone is
> any good at it. Although I'd venture to say that some are good a chess and
> suck with routers. Others may be great with routers and suck at chess. :)
> Which is better?
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Marko Milivojevic
> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 9:16 AM
> To: Antonie Henning - MWEB
> Cc: Peter Chuba; Radioactive Frog; Wes Stevens; Joseph Brunner;
> ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: CCIE, i wish to take a different path !
>
>> Personally, my type of interview would consist of a game of chess,
>> irrespective of education or experience.
>
> Why not make it more fun and use random chess?
>
> Why would playing chess be relevant in an interview for networking position?
> Just out of curiosity?
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 01 2008 - 15:35:19 ARST