Microsoft Supports Test Piracy

Discussion in 'MCSE' started by =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=, Sep 12, 2004.

  1. New to the MCSE process but old to the Test Development Process, this is my
    theory.

    Microsoft states: "The Exam Development Process
    To ensure the validity and reliability of our certification exams, Microsoft
    adheres to a rigorous exam-development process, consisting of eight mandatory
    phases: "

    Phase 2: Objective Domain Definition
    "The results of the job analysis provide the framework used to develop
    objectives. "

    Phase 3:
    "The actual exam items are written according to the prioritized objectives."

    Phase 4: Item Development
    "A pool of items is developed to measure the blueprinted objective domain."

    Now if these statements are true, how can non-obective based questions
    appear on the exams?

    I'd like to point directly at the 70-290 & 70-291 exams. Both of these
    exams had numerous questions that did not pertain to the stated "objective
    domain".

    Is it possible that Microsoft is getting a kick-back from some of the
    brain-dumpers or Test Pirates?

    Is it ethical for Microsoft to publically state it's policies and then not
    abid by them?

    Is this possibly false and misleading actions?

    Is this possibly FRAUD?

    The following was sent to me by a CTEC owner;

    "Never in our experience have we seen such a disconnect between the exams
    (only 70-290 and 70-291) and the curriculum. For these two exams, our
    teaching strategy had to change. We now try as best we can to prep the
    students for the test; as opposed to concentrating on developing a skill set
    that would enable a student to apply the most widely used aspects of MS
    technologies in the real world."

    "Make no mistake; Microsoft has had negative feedback from CTEC’s throughout
    the country. I have spoken with MCT’s from all over who agree that there is a
    problem. Microsoft is well aware of this condition."

    " ... don’t spend another minute talking to Microsoft about this. You will
    not receive an explanation from Microsoft; they will only waste your time. My
    best advice is to let my months of effort to resolve these same issues
    suffice. Advise your friends that these two exams will contain questions
    outside of the scope of the objective domain. The continuance of that
    unwritten policy will have the effect of increasing test revenue to Microsoft
    and controlling the growth rate of MCSA’s. I think both of these effects are
    desirable by Microsoft and that is why this problem persists."

    I think that Microsoft is slow wrapped around the axle trying to be the Test
    Pirates that they are in fact pushing honest individuals that are trying to
    learn and get certified to turn to the Pirates.

    Oh and by the way, when I sent in a challege Michelle B. replied,

    "The fact that a particular question appeared on the exam cannot be
    challenged in itself."

    This inspite of the fact that I can prove that the quest was a 70-291
    objective and it was on the 70-70-290 test and visa-versa.
     
    =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=, Sep 12, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Couple spelling errors please forgive me, Guess I should have done this in
    Word and ran spell check.

    .... Microsoft is slow wrapped around the axle ... should have been ...
    Microsoft is so wrapped around the axle ...

    and

    prove that the quest was a 70-291 ... should have been ... prove that the
    question was a 70-291 ...

    Thanks all,

    dz

    "dz" wrote:

    > New to the MCSE process but old to the Test Development Process, this is my
    > theory.
    >
    > Microsoft states: "The Exam Development Process
    > To ensure the validity and reliability of our certification exams, Microsoft
    > adheres to a rigorous exam-development process, consisting of eight mandatory
    > phases: "
    >
    > Phase 2: Objective Domain Definition
    > "The results of the job analysis provide the framework used to develop
    > objectives. "
    >
    > Phase 3:
    > "The actual exam items are written according to the prioritized objectives."
    >
    > Phase 4: Item Development
    > "A pool of items is developed to measure the blueprinted objective domain."
    >
    > Now if these statements are true, how can non-obective based questions
    > appear on the exams?
    >
    > I'd like to point directly at the 70-290 & 70-291 exams. Both of these
    > exams had numerous questions that did not pertain to the stated "objective
    > domain".
    >
    > Is it possible that Microsoft is getting a kick-back from some of the
    > brain-dumpers or Test Pirates?
    >
    > Is it ethical for Microsoft to publically state it's policies and then not
    > abid by them?
    >
    > Is this possibly false and misleading actions?
    >
    > Is this possibly FRAUD?
    >
    > The following was sent to me by a CTEC owner;
    >
    > "Never in our experience have we seen such a disconnect between the exams
    > (only 70-290 and 70-291) and the curriculum. For these two exams, our
    > teaching strategy had to change. We now try as best we can to prep the
    > students for the test; as opposed to concentrating on developing a skill set
    > that would enable a student to apply the most widely used aspects of MS
    > technologies in the real world."
    >
    > "Make no mistake; Microsoft has had negative feedback from CTEC’s throughout
    > the country. I have spoken with MCT’s from all over who agree that there is a
    > problem. Microsoft is well aware of this condition."
    >
    > " ... don’t spend another minute talking to Microsoft about this. You will
    > not receive an explanation from Microsoft; they will only waste your time. My
    > best advice is to let my months of effort to resolve these same issues
    > suffice. Advise your friends that these two exams will contain questions
    > outside of the scope of the objective domain. The continuance of that
    > unwritten policy will have the effect of increasing test revenue to Microsoft
    > and controlling the growth rate of MCSA’s. I think both of these effects are
    > desirable by Microsoft and that is why this problem persists."
    >
    > I think that Microsoft is slow wrapped around the axle trying to be the Test
    > Pirates that they are in fact pushing honest individuals that are trying to
    > learn and get certified to turn to the Pirates.
    >
    > Oh and by the way, when I sent in a challege Michelle B. replied,
    >
    > "The fact that a particular question appeared on the exam cannot be
    > challenged in itself."
    >
    > This inspite of the fact that I can prove that the quest was a 70-291
    > objective and it was on the 70-70-290 test and visa-versa.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=, Sep 12, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. circa Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:29:02 -0700, in
    microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=
    () said,
    > I'd like to point directly at the 70-290 & 70-291 exams. Both of these
    > exams had numerous questions that did not pertain to the stated "objective
    > domain".
    >
    >

    Perhaps you should check out what an objective domain is.

    Laura
    --
    Experience is the name every one gives to their mistakes.
    -Oscar Wilde
     
    Laura A. Robinson, Sep 13, 2004
    #3
  4. Laura darling, excellent retort, you really put me in my place.

    If Microsoft hadn’t defined their Development Process as well as they have I
    just might have to pull out my copies of Handbook for Developing
    Competency-Based Testing Programs by William E. Blank or possibly Preparing
    Instructional Objectives by Robert F. Mager. But it’s easier to read
    Microsoft’s own words at
    http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcpexams/policies/examdev.asp.

    And to look at the specific objective domain for 70-290 Microsoft has done
    an equally excellent job at
    http://www.microsoft.com/learning/exams/70-290.asp.

    I also like the job that Microsoft did with the objective domain 70-291 at
    http://www.microsoft.com/learning/exams/70-291.asp.

    What you are missing darling is that when you are taking an exam that is
    based on the 70-290 objective domain and your given an exam question that
    asks if the sky is blue the question is an invalid question. It is not part
    of the STATED OBJECTIVE DOMAIN. The question may be grammatically well
    written, knowledge level appropriate, contain 2 wrong answers, 1 distracter
    answer, and 1 correct answer; but it is still an invalid question based on
    the subject matter that is suppose to be evaluated by the exam.

    This is simply a case of ethics. I guess you don't get it.



    "Laura A. Robinson" wrote:

    > circa Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:29:02 -0700, in
    > microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=
    > () said,
    > > I'd like to point directly at the 70-290 & 70-291 exams. Both of these
    > > exams had numerous questions that did not pertain to the stated "objective
    > > domain".
    > >
    > >

    > Perhaps you should check out what an objective domain is.
    >
    > Laura
    > --
    > Experience is the name every one gives to their mistakes.
    > -Oscar Wilde
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=, Sep 13, 2004
    #4
  5. =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=

    catwalker63 Guest

    "=?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=" <> prattled ceaslessly in
    news::

    > Laura darling, excellent retort, you really put me in my place.
    >
    > If Microsoft hadn’t defined their Development Process as well as
    > they have I just might have to pull out my copies of Handbook for
    > Developing Competency-Based Testing Programs by William E. Blank or
    > possibly Preparing Instructional Objectives by Robert F. Mager. But
    > it’s easier to read Microsoft’s own words at
    > http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcpexams/policies/examdev.asp.
    >
    > And to look at the specific objective domain for 70-290 Microsoft has
    > done an equally excellent job at
    > http://www.microsoft.com/learning/exams/70-290.asp.
    >
    > I also like the job that Microsoft did with the objective domain
    > 70-291 at http://www.microsoft.com/learning/exams/70-291.asp.
    >
    > What you are missing darling is that when you are taking an exam that
    > is based on the 70-290 objective domain and your given an exam
    > question that asks if the sky is blue the question is an invalid
    > question. It is not part of the STATED OBJECTIVE DOMAIN. The
    > question may be grammatically well written, knowledge level
    > appropriate, contain 2 wrong answers, 1 distracter answer, and 1
    > correct answer; but it is still an invalid question based on the
    > subject matter that is suppose to be evaluated by the exam.
    >
    > This is simply a case of ethics. I guess you don't get it.
    >
    >
    >
    > "Laura A. Robinson" wrote:
    >
    >> circa Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:29:02 -0700, in
    >> microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=
    >> () said,
    >> > I'd like to point directly at the 70-290 & 70-291 exams. Both of
    >> > these exams had numerous questions that did not pertain to the
    >> > stated "objective domain".
    >> >
    >> >

    >> Perhaps you should check out what an objective domain is.
    >>
    >> Laura
    >> --
    >> Experience is the name every one gives to their mistakes.
    >> -Oscar Wilde
    >>


    Rowdy, I think we're going to need a lot more popcorn.

    --
    Catwalker
    aka Pu$$y Feet
    BS, MCP

    "If you think I'm hostile now, wait 'til you see me tonight."
     
    catwalker63, Sep 13, 2004
    #5
  6. circa Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:27:14 -0700, in
    microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=
    () said,
    > Laura darling, excellent retort, you really put me in my place.


    First, don't call me "darling"; it makes you appear to be a
    misogynist with an inferiority complex. Then again, you likely are.
    >
    > If Microsoft hadn’t defined their Development Process as well as they have I
    > just might have to pull out my copies of Handbook for Developing
    > Competency-Based Testing Programs by William E. Blank or possibly Preparing
    > Instructional Objectives by Robert F. Mager.


    Perhaps you should, as you've clearly not read them.

    > But it’s easier to read
    > Microsoft’s own words at
    > http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcpexams/policies/examdev.asp.
    >
    > And to look at the specific objective domain for 70-290 Microsoft has done
    > an equally excellent job at
    > http://www.microsoft.com/learning/exams/70-290.asp.
    >
    > I also like the job that Microsoft did with the objective domain 70-291 at
    > http://www.microsoft.com/learning/exams/70-291.asp.
    >
    > What you are missing darling is that when you are taking an exam that is
    > based on the 70-290 objective domain and your given an exam question that
    > asks if the sky is blue the question is an invalid question. It is not part
    > of the STATED OBJECTIVE DOMAIN.


    And what you're missing, you hostile nutcase, is that you're tossing
    out a pile of insinuation without a single example to back whatever
    your supposed point is. Got an issue? Bring it up with Microsoft,
    rather than posting it in a certification newsgroup.

    > The question may be grammatically well
    > written, knowledge level appropriate, contain 2 wrong answers, 1 distracter
    > answer, and 1 correct answer; but it is still an invalid question based on
    > the subject matter that is suppose to be evaluated by the exam.


    See above.

    >
    > This is simply a case of ethics. I guess you don't get it.


    This is simply a case of some anonymous schmuck making some sort of
    obtuse, veiled accusation that makes no sense whatsoever and thinking
    that he's actually coherent. Get help.

    Laura
    >
    >
    >
    > "Laura A. Robinson" wrote:
    >
    > > circa Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:29:02 -0700, in
    > > microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=
    > > () said,
    > > > I'd like to point directly at the 70-290 & 70-291 exams. Both of these
    > > > exams had numerous questions that did not pertain to the stated "objective
    > > > domain".
    > > >
    > > >

    > > Perhaps you should check out what an objective domain is.
    > >
    > > Laura
    > > --
    > > Experience is the name every one gives to their mistakes.
    > > -Oscar Wilde
    > >

    >


    --
    Experience is the name every one gives to their mistakes.
    -Oscar Wilde
     
    Laura A. Robinson, Sep 13, 2004
    #6
  7. =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=

    JaR Guest

    In microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, catwalker63 climbed on a soapbox &
    opined:

    > Rowdy, I think we're going to need a lot more popcorn.
    >


    And beer.

    JaR
     
    JaR, Sep 13, 2004
    #7
  8. =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=

    JaR Guest

    In microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Laura A. Robinson climbed on a
    soapbox & opined:
    >
    > This is simply a case of some anonymous schmuck making some sort of
    > obtuse, veiled accusation that makes no sense whatsoever and thinking
    > that he's actually coherent. Get help.


    *Golf clap*

    JaR
     
    JaR, Sep 13, 2004
    #8
  9. =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=

    catwalker63 Guest

    JaR <> prattled ceaslessly in
    news:Xns9562EDE584563plentespamsuxsofthom@207.46.248.16:

    > In microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Laura A. Robinson climbed on a
    > soapbox & opined:
    >>
    >> This is simply a case of some anonymous schmuck making some sort of
    >> obtuse, veiled accusation that makes no sense whatsoever and thinking
    >> that he's actually coherent. Get help.

    >
    > *Golf clap*
    >
    > JaR
    >


    Someone get me a guiness. I don't wanna miss anything.

    --
    Catwalker
    aka Pu$$y Feet
    BS, MCP

    "If you think I'm hostile now, wait 'til you see me tonight."
     
    catwalker63, Sep 13, 2004
    #9
  10. =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=

    T-Bone Guest

    "Laura A. Robinson" <> wrote
    > And what you're missing, you hostile nutcase, is that you're tossing
    > out a pile of insinuation without a single example to back whatever
    > your supposed point is. Got an issue? Bring it up with Microsoft,
    > rather than posting it in a certification newsgroup.


    D'oh! It appears I missed all the fun. And I just picked up another
    scarborough sixpack.
     
    T-Bone, Sep 13, 2004
    #10
  11. Still can't see the big picture huh!!!

    As far as contacting Microsoft, here is one reply:

    Hello Dennis,

    Thank you for your e-mail regarding your experience with exam 70-290.

    After reviewing your email, as well as our discussion on the phone, we can
    definitely understand the degree of your concerns. You bring to light several
    scenarios which can prove to be well worth taking into consideration.
    Specifically, your comments regarding the inclusion of vague elements and
    procedures on exam 70-290 and how they may push candidates to turn to
    Braindump type materials.

    We can assure you that we regularly review feedback submitted by candidates
    and have witnessed first hand how feedback can bring about changes in the
    future. If you have any additional feedback on how we might improve the
    quality of the MCP Program, please do not hesitate to contact us and we will
    be happy to forward your comments to the appropriate group where your input
    will be taken into consideration. As previously mentioned in our phone call,
    we unfortunately cannot provide detailed responses regarding any outcome
    which may arise from candidate feedback.

    We would like to say that we were extremely pleased to hear that you passed
    your exam 70-290 (with a score of 914 no less). We consider you to be a
    valued member of our certification program. It is from the concern and
    devotion from candidates such as yourself which will continue to shape our
    program. We are certain that with your dedication, you will find success in
    your certification endeavors.

    If there is anything else we can do for you, please let us know. Thank you
    for contacting Microsoft.


    Eric N.

    http://www.microsoft.com/traincert


    Here is a second:


    Hello Dennis,

    Thank you for your e-mail regarding your exam challenge in regards to exam
    70-291.

    We understand your concern in this matter. We have received your exam item
    challenge request form and appreciate your interest in the MCP program. Your
    request cannot be processed because:

    You have submitted a form containing challenges of more than one exam item.
    Please note, only one item can be submitted on each challenge. In addition,
    the exam item challenge form is used in the event that you feel that none of
    the answers provided were correct. The fact that a particular question
    appeared on the exam cannot be challenged in itself.

    Our records do however, indicate that feedback has already been forwarded
    through the appropriate channels regarding exam 70-290 and 70-291 content.

    For general information about the MCP program and current news relating to
    the MCP program, please visit http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/

    If there is anything else we can do for you, please let us know. Thank you
    for contacting Microsoft.


    Michelle B

    http://www.microsoft.com/traincert

    Their legal Dept. can be contacted via FAX Attn. Bradford Smith Sr. VP @
    425-936-7329.

    As far as specific examples:

    Kindly show me in the 70-290 objective domain a reference to SUS. There are
    questions concerning it on the 70-290 exam.

    Concerning 70-291 show me an objective that maps back to printer spooler.
    There are questions concerning it on the 70-291 exam.

    These are issues that Microsoft MCPHelp admit do exist. Their (in MCPHelp
    section) Official Stance on it is that these are areas that a candidate
    should be knowledgeable in. My stance is that Microsoft has done a
    tremendous job stating and publishing excepted Vocational Education
    Methodologies it’s a shame that the curriculum development department follows
    them and their exam development department ignores them.

    As for as posting them to the community what is the community here for if
    not to discuss issues that effect the program and its members. Or would your
    rather see more postings concerning whether or not our government is killing
    its own people. How about some more cat rescues. That rely helps the
    community.

    Microsoft is doing a great job trying to reduce the Paper MCSEs, what are
    you doing? Continue clogging up a Newsgroup with serious discussions
    concerning name origins such as van vs. von. That really helps.

    If Microsoft is going to post its Methodology and claim to use the
    Vocational Education excepted practices I believe they should follow them.

    Rather than the personal attacks why not prove me wrong?


    "Laura A. Robinson" wrote:

    > circa Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:27:14 -0700, in
    > microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=
    > () said,
    > > Laura darling, excellent retort, you really put me in my place.

    >
    > First, don't call me "darling"; it makes you appear to be a
    > misogynist with an inferiority complex. Then again, you likely are.
    > >
    > > If Microsoft hadn’t defined their Development Process as well as they have I
    > > just might have to pull out my copies of Handbook for Developing
    > > Competency-Based Testing Programs by William E. Blank or possibly Preparing
    > > Instructional Objectives by Robert F. Mager.

    >
    > Perhaps you should, as you've clearly not read them.
    >
    > > But it’s easier to read
    > > Microsoft’s own words at
    > > http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcpexams/policies/examdev.asp.
    > >
    > > And to look at the specific objective domain for 70-290 Microsoft has done
    > > an equally excellent job at
    > > http://www.microsoft.com/learning/exams/70-290.asp.
    > >
    > > I also like the job that Microsoft did with the objective domain 70-291 at
    > > http://www.microsoft.com/learning/exams/70-291.asp.
    > >
    > > What you are missing darling is that when you are taking an exam that is
    > > based on the 70-290 objective domain and your given an exam question that
    > > asks if the sky is blue the question is an invalid question. It is not part
    > > of the STATED OBJECTIVE DOMAIN.

    >
    > And what you're missing, you hostile nutcase, is that you're tossing
    > out a pile of insinuation without a single example to back whatever
    > your supposed point is. Got an issue? Bring it up with Microsoft,
    > rather than posting it in a certification newsgroup.
    >
    > > The question may be grammatically well
    > > written, knowledge level appropriate, contain 2 wrong answers, 1 distracter
    > > answer, and 1 correct answer; but it is still an invalid question based on
    > > the subject matter that is suppose to be evaluated by the exam.

    >
    > See above.
    >
    > >
    > > This is simply a case of ethics. I guess you don't get it.

    >
    > This is simply a case of some anonymous schmuck making some sort of
    > obtuse, veiled accusation that makes no sense whatsoever and thinking
    > that he's actually coherent. Get help.
    >
    > Laura
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > "Laura A. Robinson" wrote:
    > >
    > > > circa Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:29:02 -0700, in
    > > > microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=
    > > > () said,
    > > > > I'd like to point directly at the 70-290 & 70-291 exams. Both of these
    > > > > exams had numerous questions that did not pertain to the stated "objective
    > > > > domain".
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > Perhaps you should check out what an objective domain is.
    > > >
    > > > Laura
    > > > --
    > > > Experience is the name every one gives to their mistakes.
    > > > -Oscar Wilde
    > > >

    > >

    >
    > --
    > Experience is the name every one gives to their mistakes.
    > -Oscar Wilde
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=, Sep 13, 2004
    #11
  12. =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=

    T-Bone Guest

    "dz" <> wrote
    > New to the MCSE process but old to the Test Development Process, this is

    my
    > theory.


    In fact, so sure of this is he, that's he's multiposted it to the other MS
    certification groups as well.
     
    T-Bone, Sep 13, 2004
    #12
  13. =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=

    T-Bone Guest

    "dz" <> wrote
    > I figure if I can get enough consumers of the Certification Program to say
    > enough is enough, that Microsoft MCPHelp just might stop this unfair

    practice.

    Yes, but your approach has a greater chance of getting you labeled as a kook
    than achieving your objectives.
     
    T-Bone, Sep 13, 2004
    #13
  14. =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=

    kpg Guest

    "catwalker63" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns9562F1EBDF230catwalker63athotmail@216.196.97.136...
    > # Name resolution details: file://c:\temp\146255.htm (9/13/2004 10:19:26

    AM) #
    > JaR <> prattled ceaslessly in
    > news:Xns9562EDE584563plentespamsuxsofthom@207.46.248.16:
    >
    > > In microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Laura A. Robinson climbed on a
    > > soapbox & opined:
    > >>
    > >> This is simply a case of some anonymous schmuck making some sort of
    > >> obtuse, veiled accusation that makes no sense whatsoever and thinking
    > >> that he's actually coherent. Get help.

    > >
    > > *Golf clap*
    > >
    > > JaR
    > >

    >
    > Someone get me a guiness. I don't wanna miss anything.
    >


    Someone get me a dictionary. I have to look up a few things...

    --
    kpg A+ MCP MCNGP 0x22
    In theory, there is no difference
    between theory and practice.
    But, in practice, there is
    - Jan L.A. van de Snepscheut
     
    kpg, Sep 13, 2004
    #14
  15. =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=

    Mike T. Guest

    This one's gonna get good in a hurry.

    --
    Mike T
    Spiffy sig currently under development.
     
    Mike T., Sep 13, 2004
    #15
  16. >First, don't call me "darling"

    is Shirley ok :)

    Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
     
    The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere, Sep 13, 2004
    #16
  17. >I figure if I can get enough consumers of the Certification Program to say
    >enough is enough, that Microsoft MCPHelp just might stop this unfair practice.


    meanwhile back in the real world....

    Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
     
    The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere, Sep 13, 2004
    #17
  18. =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=

    Neil Guest

    babbling on and on again The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere <.>
    spewed in news:eek::

    >>First, don't call me "darling"

    >
    > is Shirley ok :)
    >
    > Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
    >


    Shirley you're joking....

    --
    Neil MCNGP #30
    the "curious" hair on the soap of society
     
    Neil, Sep 13, 2004
    #18
  19. =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=

    Neil Guest

    babbling on and on again "T-Bone" <reply2me@thenewsgroup> spewed in
    news::

    > "dz" <> wrote
    >> I figure if I can get enough consumers of the Certification Program
    >> to say enough is enough, that Microsoft MCPHelp just might stop this
    >> unfair

    > practice.
    >
    > Yes, but your approach has a greater chance of getting you labeled as
    > a kook than achieving your objectives.
    >
    >
    >


    he is a kook. Passing an exam and bitching about it to your buddies is
    one thing. bitching to the planet, Microsoft _AND_ you buddies (no doubt)
    is just kooky....

    --
    Neil MCNGP #30
    the "curious" hair on the soap of society
     
    Neil, Sep 13, 2004
    #19
  20. Hi Laura
    Nice to see you posting. Just dropped in for a quick visit to see if
    the regular crew were around.

    Thanks for your (sometimes curt) encouragement - I just cleared the
    2003 MCSE (7 exam track) which I'm convinced I got through owing to
    some of your recommended readings on DNS and AD.

    DZ
    Laura is on the money. In short wingeing without citing specifics is
    a waste of your time as well as the time you're expecting the other
    usenet people to waste reading your post.

    Laura's motto is dont expect others to be a substitute or a short cut
    for you to progress.

    And another angry old man complaint, DZ, : Dont waffle.




    On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 01:18:40 -0400, Laura A. Robinson
    <> declared in their epistle:

    ><<<SNIP>>>

    ================================
    My Hero:
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/30/index.html
    (remove vroomfondle to email me)
    ================================
     
    Marlin Munrow, Sep 13, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=

    Microsoft Supports Test Piracy

    =?Utf-8?B?ZHo=?=, Sep 12, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    474
    Vladimir Mazek
    Sep 16, 2004
  2. Guest

    test test test test test test test

    Guest, Jul 2, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    966
    halfalifer
    Jul 2, 2003
  3. dz
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    312
  4. dz
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    402
  5. dz
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    304
Loading...

Share This Page