To cheat, or not to cheat?

Discussion in 'MCAD' started by Mark, Mar 23, 2006.

  1. Mark

    Mark Guest

    i'm confused. when some posters to this newsgroup ask about Testking
    and Transcender, they get flamed for even thinking about cheating,
    whilst others are left alone.

    can anyone (eg an MVP) give a definitive explanation of what's cheating
    and what isn't? or point me to where microsoft does the same?

    many say testking is short for "brain dumps" (whatever they are!).

    some say transcender is legitimate. if this is the case, surely thety
    must be extremely perspicacious to be able to 'guess' almost
    word-for-word what text is in the questions and answers (and case
    studies), not just the underlying subject/theory!

    is it legal/legitimate to use brain dump type info to compile practice
    tests (i guess not)? or is it legal to use said practice tests for exam
    prep (grey area?)? of course, actually using brain dumps for exam prep
    is illegal.

    can anyone shed any more light on the subject?

    thanks,
    mark (MCP, MCAD, LPIC-1, (1 exam left for MCSD :))
    Mark, Mar 23, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Microsoft Learning site lists two certified practice test providers - Self
    Test Software and MeasureUp. So they are fully legal. I used MeasureUp tests
    for exam preparation. They often look like real exam questions but they are
    never the same. As someone in this newsgroup said - you can't just remember
    the answers and go to the exam with these test. You have to understand what
    is it all about.

    Can't say anything about testking or transcender. The only fact is that they
    are not certified by Microsoft.

    Before you start an exam you must sign an NDA agreement prohibiting exam
    questions disclosure. So any use of these questions is supposed to be
    illegal.

    It's up to you whether to use braindumps or not. But consider the result -
    if you pass exam without them then you confirm you know the topic (and you
    have learned it while preparing), and if you pass exam with braindumps you
    just get exam passed.

    PS The link is
    http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcpexams/prepare/practicetests.asp


    Regards,
    Alexey

    "Mark" <" <sorry, don't want any spam!> wrote in message
    news:...
    > i'm confused. when some posters to this newsgroup ask about Testking and
    > Transcender, they get flamed for even thinking about cheating, whilst
    > others are left alone.
    >
    > can anyone (eg an MVP) give a definitive explanation of what's cheating
    > and what isn't? or point me to where microsoft does the same?
    >
    > many say testking is short for "brain dumps" (whatever they are!).
    >
    > some say transcender is legitimate. if this is the case, surely thety
    > must be extremely perspicacious to be able to 'guess' almost word-for-word
    > what text is in the questions and answers (and case studies), not just the
    > underlying subject/theory!
    >
    > is it legal/legitimate to use brain dump type info to compile practice
    > tests (i guess not)? or is it legal to use said practice tests for exam
    > prep (grey area?)? of course, actually using brain dumps for exam prep is
    > illegal.
    >
    > can anyone shed any more light on the subject?
    >
    > thanks,
    > mark (MCP, MCAD, LPIC-1, (1 exam left for MCSD :))
    Alexey Peshekhonov, Mar 23, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Mark

    Mark Guest

    Alexey Peshekhonov wrote:
    > Before you start an exam you must sign an NDA agreement prohibiting exam
    > questions disclosure. So any use of these questions is supposed to be
    > illegal.


    yes; disclosing what's in the exams is illegal, eg compiling a cheat
    sheet or brain dump. but what about _using_ said compilations to
    prepare? or creating a practice test from said compilations (like
    Transcender, TestKing, etc appear to be doing)?

    does MS's recommendation/affiliation for/with MeasureUp and STS
    effectively mean that the others like Transcender are illegal?
    Mark, Mar 23, 2006
    #3
  4. Purely my opinion, but the exams are meant to validate you have the skills
    to be successful in whatever area and level the exam is meant to test at. In
    the case of MCAD, I would suggest that to be "able to develop applications
    using the products". For MCSD, it might be (not my cert or cert area; I do
    the IT pro side) design and develop enterprise-level applications.

    It is illegal to copy protected content and republish it (even on the
    Internet), and the NDA you accept before taking the exam spells out quite
    clearly what you are agreeing to around that prior to taking the exam.

    Is using braindumps illegal? That's a legal question, but if you do not have
    the skills the exam is testing and you use braindumps to "get past" the
    exam, then you are cheating yourself and the chances of you being successful
    at whatever job you land are not nearly as good.

    --
    --
    Andy Ruth
    Microsoft Learning

    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
    rights.

    "Mark" <" <sorry, don't want any spam!> wrote in message
    news:...
    > i'm confused. when some posters to this newsgroup ask about Testking and
    > Transcender, they get flamed for even thinking about cheating, whilst
    > others are left alone.
    >
    > can anyone (eg an MVP) give a definitive explanation of what's cheating
    > and what isn't? or point me to where microsoft does the same?
    >
    > many say testking is short for "brain dumps" (whatever they are!).
    >
    > some say transcender is legitimate. if this is the case, surely thety
    > must be extremely perspicacious to be able to 'guess' almost word-for-word
    > what text is in the questions and answers (and case studies), not just the
    > underlying subject/theory!
    >
    > is it legal/legitimate to use brain dump type info to compile practice
    > tests (i guess not)? or is it legal to use said practice tests for exam
    > prep (grey area?)? of course, actually using brain dumps for exam prep is
    > illegal.
    >
    > can anyone shed any more light on the subject?
    >
    > thanks,
    > mark (MCP, MCAD, LPIC-1, (1 exam left for MCSD :))
    Andy Ruth [MSFT], Mar 23, 2006
    #4
  5. March 23, 2006

    You've hit one of the roots of the confusion in these newsgroups... is the
    universal phrase "brain dumps" directly in all cases "questions and answers"
    to the exams? I've heard "brain dumps" be used before when the person didn't
    actually know what they are thought to be... hence, got flamed before
    realizing people think they are asking for exam cheats when really they just
    wanted advice on study guides/books. This phrase "braindumps" really needs
    to be evaluated on an individual basis, although most of the time the eval
    will probably end in disclosure of NDA material.

    As far as the practice exams, I use the ones which come with the MS Press
    books. As far as whether people can take question & answers from the real
    exam into the practice exam... to distribute in any way Q&As from the exam
    is a direct breach of the NDA according to my understanding. Disclosure &
    breach of an NDA would almost certainly occur in some way for a practice
    test company to get the Q&As...

    Anyway, TestKing is reportedly said to have exact Q&As, and therefore has a
    bad reputation. Even if you don't mean to be asking for what would appear to
    be "illegal" material or whatever.... the phrases "testking" or "braindumps"
    is pretty sure to get you flamed in at least these newsgroups.

    --
    Joseph Bittman
    Microsoft Certified Solution Developer
    Microsoft Most Valuable Professional -- DPM

    Web Site/Blog: http://CactiDevelopers.ResDev.Net/

    "Mark" <" <sorry, don't want any spam!> wrote in message
    news:...
    > i'm confused. when some posters to this newsgroup ask about Testking and
    > Transcender, they get flamed for even thinking about cheating, whilst
    > others are left alone.
    >
    > can anyone (eg an MVP) give a definitive explanation of what's cheating
    > and what isn't? or point me to where microsoft does the same?
    >
    > many say testking is short for "brain dumps" (whatever they are!).
    >
    > some say transcender is legitimate. if this is the case, surely thety
    > must be extremely perspicacious to be able to 'guess' almost word-for-word
    > what text is in the questions and answers (and case studies), not just the
    > underlying subject/theory!
    >
    > is it legal/legitimate to use brain dump type info to compile practice
    > tests (i guess not)? or is it legal to use said practice tests for exam
    > prep (grey area?)? of course, actually using brain dumps for exam prep is
    > illegal.
    >
    > can anyone shed any more light on the subject?
    >
    > thanks,
    > mark (MCP, MCAD, LPIC-1, (1 exam left for MCSD :))
    Joseph Bittman MVP MCSD, Mar 23, 2006
    #5
  6. Mark

    Saga Guest

    While we each determine what is legal and what isn't, here is a post
    that I found in
    another newsgroup. This guy gives the word "cheat" a whole new
    definition!!!

    I left the post as-is, only grabling the emails.

    Saga
    <end of my post>

    Subject: Obtain MCSE certificaiton without exams(Pay after check
    results)100% passing gaurantee

    FRIENDS
    Here i m going to tell you the fastest way to get
    MICROSOFT,CISCO,COMPTIA,ORACLE,SOLAIS certified without efforts......

    friends i have five vue and prometric testing sites here in
    INDIA.......so, i will do the exams on the behalf of the candidates,
    make them pass and charge some extra amount from them.........
    see i need ur some details then i will book ur exam on my testing site,



    make u pass in exam then send scoresheet to you....by using that
    scoresheet u will easily able to check ur exam status online on related



    official secure site.....
    when u will check ur exam status online only then send me payment
    through western union money transfer.......


    what details i need from the candidates :-


    1. candidate full name(that he wants to appear on his scoresheet and
    certificate)
    2. candidate full address(for certificatio delivery)
    3. candidate passport or driving liciense scan copy(as photo id proof)
    4. candidate landline as well as cell number(with country code)
    5. correct exam numbers.......


    so, if anyone is really intrested in this then jsut mail me these
    details then he will be certified within a week....


    rates :-


    any microsoft exam :- 250 usd(including exam fee)
    ccna exam :- 500 usd(including exam fee)
    ccnp each exam :- 600 usd(inlcduing exam fee)


    so.if anyone intrested in this just mail me at
    or
    u can also catch me on chat on my both messengers...
    thanzzzzzzzzzz friends
    vinay





    "Mark" <" <sorry, don't want any spam!> wrote in message
    news:...
    > i'm confused. when some posters to this newsgroup ask about Testking
    > and Transcender, they get flamed for even thinking about cheating,
    > whilst others are left alone.

    --snipped--
    Saga, Mar 23, 2006
    #6
  7. Mark

    Mark Guest

    >>>Before you start an exam you must sign an NDA agreement prohibiting exam
    >>>questions disclosure. So any use of these questions is supposed to be
    >>>illegal.

    >>
    >>yes; disclosing what's in the exams is illegal, eg compiling a cheat sheet
    >>or brain dump. but what about _using_ said compilations to prepare? or
    >>creating a practice test from said compilations (like Transcender,
    >>TestKing, etc appear to be doing)?

    >
    > You can't be serious. If compiling the exams from actual exam questions is
    > illegal, you don't think using said exams would be illegal? In other words,
    > do you think it should only be illegal to create and sell illegal drugs, but
    > not illegal to use them? If Microsoft discovers that you have used illegal
    > study materials for you exam, you can and will be stripped of that
    > certification, and banned from re-taking it. So think long and hard before
    > making that decision. I can, and has happened in the past.


    i wasn't trying to start a discussion about individuals' ethics. nor
    was i asking whether or not you think i should use brain dumps. i was
    attempting to discover the definitive rules governing the use of various
    'practice tests' eg testking, transcender, etc (as they appear to be
    based on brain dumps).

    perhaps i could have chosen a less equivocal subject line for my
    original posting. maybe something like "TestKing, Transcender ==
    Cheating?". appologies. i should have known better :/

    >>does MS's recommendation/affiliation for/with MeasureUp and STS
    >>effectively mean that the others like Transcender are illegal?

    >
    > Transcenders are not br@in dumps. Transcender was recently aquired by
    > either Self Test or Measure Up, I don't remember which one, but one of the
    > officially approved ones by Microsoft. I've been told that many years ago,
    > like ten or more, Trancender was indeed a br@in dump, but they'd cleaned
    > their act up a long time ago.


    allegedly(!) both testking and transcender somehow manage to compile
    practice tests that mirror the actual exams literally word-for-word on
    many questions. they often match both the questions and answers even to
    the extent of using the exact same names of the companies, servers,
    databases, etc used in the case studies! how could they possibly do
    that unless they used brain dumps or similar tactics that contravened
    the NDAs?

    posters talk of certain practice test providers as being 'certified' or
    'authorised' as you did, eg measureUp, Self Test, implying others like
    testking and transcender are unauthorised. this is rather misleading
    and, at worst, incorrect(?). i cannot find any microsoft documentation
    that authorises [the use of] some providers over others. they merely
    appear to be recommending MeasureUp and Self Test SW, whilst
    conspicuously failing to mention all the others [example ref:
    http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcpexams/prepare/]. please correct me
    if i'm wrong.

    i don't think it would be unreasonable to assume microsoft has some
    financial deal w/ certain providers to allow them to be linked from
    microsoft's web site in this way. i would hope microsoft vets a
    provider's material to try and discern whether they appear to have used
    brain dumps to complile their material. this would explain why testking
    and transcender are not 'recommended'/listed on microsoft.com.

    some people get flamed for merely asking about testking! transcender
    seems to have more acceptance.

    the 'mirroring' of the actual exams combined w/ the fact that microsoft
    don't recommend the material leads to many people's inference that it's
    illegal at worst, unethical at best and at least unauthorised. a novice
    may go out and buy material from testking w/ no idea that they nor the
    provider are doing anything unethical --as was pointed out by J Bittman.
    instead of flaming such people, shouldn't these people be directed to
    or provided with some sort of faq or 'best practices' info, eg from an
    mvp, as it seems to be a very common query? of course, even that would
    be unnecessary if microsoft were to address the issue in the first instance.

    even if transcender and testking did 'have to' use brain dump sites to
    compile practice tests, it wouldn't be hard for them to obfuscate or
    otherwise modify the content so the questions were more generic;
    maintaining the theory/concept but removing any specifics. it appears
    they're _trying_ to make their practice tests match the exam questions
    in order to appeal to the less ethically motivated people.

    this is the crux of what seems to separate the practice test providers
    into the two camps. the question is, where is the line through this
    grey area drawn (in terms of legality, etc)? and who draws it/should
    draw it? personally, i think microsoft should certify practice tests so
    that we as consumers can make well informed judgements on what material
    to use and to remove the possibility of using ignorance as an excuse for
    (indirectly or otherwise) cheating.

    i think it's quite shameful of microsoft to avoid such a poignant subject.

    > By the way, there are no MVP's in certification, only Microsoft technologies
    > and applications to my knowledge.


    forgive me, for i don't understand what it is you're trying to say here.

    > Please don't even consider using a br@in dump to study. You say you're one
    > exam short of completing your MCSD. Assuming you didn't use dumps to pass
    > all your other exams, wouldn't you rather feel good about your
    > accomplishments? And wouldn't you rather not lower the value of
    > certification in the eyes of employers by cheating your way into the cert?


    this is not conducive to the intended goals of this thread. fyi, i
    don't cheat!


    regards,
    mark
    Mark, Mar 24, 2006
    #7
  8. Mark

    Mark Guest

    Frisbee® wrote:
    > Apologies for mis-understanding your intentions. Usually, when someone
    > posts something along the lines that you have, they are considering using
    > br@indumps. For what it's worth, we get a lot of those kinds of posts, and
    > usually I don't feel the need to take the time to even reply, at least not
    > at length, but yours was intelligently composed, I thought, so it was worth
    > my time to reply.


    accepted ;)

    >>allegedly(!) both testking and transcender somehow manage to compile
    >>practice tests that mirror the actual exams literally word-for-word on
    >>many questions. they often match both the questions and answers even to
    >>the extent of using the exact same names of the companies, servers,
    >>databases, etc used in the case studies! how could they possibly do that
    >>unless they used brain dumps or similar tactics that contravened the NDAs?

    >
    > Obviously I can't vouch for all of Trancender's exams, since there's a lot
    > of exams out there, and obviously even more study exams. All I can pass on
    > is general consensus, and that consensus is that Trancender's are not br@in
    > dumps. If you have other first-hand experience, then it would place this in
    > doubt. I'm just surprised that a company with the brand name and presence
    > of Trancenders would do something like that. They are an American-based
    > company, and as such, would be much more accessible to Microsoft's legal
    > teams than makers of exam simulations that are overseas.


    suprised? i was knocked off my feet!

    the thing is, the NDA only says its illegal to disclose what's in the
    exam, not that it's illegal for a company to trawl the web for brain
    dump type data and compile a practice test/Qs from it (as far as i
    know), or illegal to _use_ such practice tests to prepare.

    i think this could even be taken as far as saying that the dedicated
    brain dump web sites are not illegal either (but i'm no legal expert)!
    surely the only lucidly illegal persons are those whom disclose what was
    in the exam in the first instance (eg disclosing to a brain dump web
    site after sitting an exam). if they _were_ illegal, i suggest we'd
    have heard by now of microsoft taking these brain dump site people to
    court, wouldn't we?

    this (if true) would also go some way to explain why microsoft are
    conspicuously avoiding defining exactly what is legal and what isn't, or
    which material providers are illegal/legal, or why they're
    'recommending' some providers over others. think about it ...if
    microsoft were to tell everyone that it's not actually illegal to use a
    brain dump (or practice tests that appear to be based on them), nobody
    would think twice about using them and the quality of the cert would be
    substantially reduced.

    i also think that people 'in the know', eg those who actually work for
    microsoft, etc all know that the above is true and purposely avoid the
    contentious issue in fear of letting people know the truth, or upset
    their employer/peers.

    of course, this is all speculation and hard to prove either way. and so
    it's left to continue unchallenged...

    > Sometimes I, and other MCNGP may be a bit over-zealous when we see these
    > kinds of posts. Most of us do indeed try to give people the benefit of the
    > doubt, some of us can be like pit bulls.


    can you tell me a bit about this MCNGP thing? does it stand for "Mean
    Certified News Group Poster" as described in MCP Magazine article
    <http://www.mcpmag.com/columns/article.asp?EditorialsID=396>, which
    describes you guys and gals as follows:

    "[...] a group of trolls claiming to hold the MCNGP (Mean Certified News
    Group Poster) certification have established their own little fiefdom.
    Woe to the individual who posts to that newsgroup unaware of the evils
    that lurk there -you will be flamed."

    reading that, you'd be forgiven for thinking MCNGP is a new microsoft
    certification, yet i can't find any reference to it on microsoft.com!

    mcngp.co.uk uses the "®" (or "(R)") character to claim a Registered
    Trade Mark is held (eg MCNGP®). do you know who owns this? or is it
    also a part of the general attempt at humour that seems to underly the
    group? is it all meant to be taken with humour, or are you MCNGPs
    honestly expecting people to take you seriously in these newsgroups?

    i've visited the mcngp.com and mcngp.co.uk web sites, but suprisingly,
    the site's faq does not explain what the letters stand for (i found it
    to be empty).

    >>i think it's quite shameful of microsoft to avoid such a poignant subject.

    >
    > Again, after having talked to various MS employees myself, I better
    > understand their position in this. In some ways, their hands are tied.
    > It's not that they're doing nothing about it, they are. Unfortunately, it
    > takes time, and clever legal strategies.


    can you ellaborate further? exactly who (or what dept) did you talk to
    about it and what is this action you say they're doing?

    >>>By the way, there are no MVP's in certification, only Microsoft
    >>>technologies and applications to my knowledge.

    >>
    >>forgive me, for i don't understand what it is you're trying to say here.

    >
    > I think your original post asked for an MVP to reply. I was merely
    > commenting that their are no MVP's in certification, only in technologies
    > like VB, Excel, etc. I mean, you might still value a reply from an MVP
    > higher (like Mr. Bittman) but an MVP does not necessarily have any
    > experience in certification. Joseph does, but that's not what his MVP is
    > in. At the same time, I got my first certification (from MS, anyway) when
    > Joseph was eleven years old, and I was a very late starter in certification.


    interesting. so is it pretty meaningless to put "MVP" in your usenet
    name or signature w/out qualifying it w/ the subject it's for, eg
    "MVP-Excel"?

    thank you for an interesting and useful conversation :)

    regards,
    mark
    Mark, Mar 24, 2006
    #8
  9. March 24, 2006

    ---
    "> I think your original post asked for an MVP to reply. I was merely
    > commenting that their are no MVP's in certification, only in technologies
    > like VB, Excel, etc. I mean, you might still value a reply from an MVP
    > higher (like Mr. Bittman) but an MVP does not necessarily have any
    > experience in certification. Joseph does, but that's not what his MVP is
    > in. At the same time, I got my first certification (from MS, anyway) when
    > Joseph was eleven years old, and I was a very late starter in
    > certification.


    interesting. so is it pretty meaningless to put "MVP" in your usenet
    name or signature w/out qualifying it w/ the subject it's for, eg
    "MVP-Excel"?"
    ---

    I got my first certification at barely 13 years old, and so have had over 2
    years of certification monitoring & experience. As far as the MVP signature
    question and about their validity of answering questions in other fields
    than "their" product... although not an exact science, from what I've seen,
    MVPs have a higher reliablity for providing accurate information than
    otherwise. Also, even though I'm not an MVP in certification, I don't give
    out information which I would not do myself if I was in the poster's
    position. In this way, if someone posts a question about certification paths
    regarding circumstances containing jobs, employers, career paths,
    certification versions, I attempt to think as much as possible as if I were
    in the same exact situation. I then decide whether I know enough of the
    subject to *at least* provide information which I would feel would be very
    much appropriately applicable in the situation... and if so, I post what I
    would do in the situation. I won't post if I feel I might lead someone on a
    wild goose chase, or if it has a likely downside.... I feel most MVPs think
    along these lines whether or not the topic is in the MVP's product's scope,
    and therefore I believe "we" have a higher degree of reliable and specific
    posts than a random sampling of non-MVP posts. Just my thoughts...

    As far as putting MVP - XXXXX in their signature, I still feel one could
    feel better about taking advice from any MVP in any area (assuming the MVP
    wouldn't give advice if he/she didn't feel it would be very close to
    accurate & helpful), although if the topic is the exact product they are an
    MVP for... it makes it much better. :) As far as mine, it is System Center
    Data Protection Manager - Microsoft's new disk-based backup solution. I was
    also given the choice of being one of Windows Server 2003 R2's MVPs,
    although I decided to go with DPM. I have been using computers since I was 4
    years old, and therefore have 11 years of experience in IT. People
    frequently state I have more knowledge and can apply it better to situations
    than adults. I was voted by R2 beta testers as one of the Top 5 R2 Beta
    Mentors, and was also the Technical Reviewer for DPM's e-learning course.
    Recently, I was invited to all 11 of the new developer generation beta
    exams, which I just completed. In this way, although my product is
    specifically DPM, I still have broad experience in many many fields, and
    feel the information I give out is accurate enough to act upon it myself.

    To re-cap, I think MVPs aren't limited to just their product scope for
    accurate information. By making sure the information they are about to
    provide in any subject is very relevant and accurate, an MVP in XML could
    provide the same quality of post & information as I could in DPM's NG. . . .
    It just means the XML MVP most likely isn't going to be able to provide the
    same quality on as frequent basis as myself. In other words, I think all
    posts by MVPs are of the same "quality", just that a certain product helps
    distinguish the "quantity" of posts expected on a specific topic. If I drop
    into a VB newsgroup, it doesn't mean I can't answer a certain specific
    question as well as the next... but just that I'm not expected to be able to
    answer lots of other questions. -- I hope this helps clarify and make sense.


    BTW, Frisbee, it was interesting to hear your opinion in a polite fashion.
    :)


    --
    Joseph Bittman
    Microsoft Certified Solution Developer
    Microsoft Most Valuable Professional -- DPM

    Web Site/Blog: http://CactiDevelopers.ResDev.Net/

    "Mark" <" <sorry, don't want any spam!> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > Frisbee® wrote:
    >> Apologies for mis-understanding your intentions. Usually, when someone
    >> posts something along the lines that you have, they are considering using
    >> br@indumps. For what it's worth, we get a lot of those kinds of posts,
    >> and usually I don't feel the need to take the time to even reply, at
    >> least not at length, but yours was intelligently composed, I thought, so
    >> it was worth my time to reply.

    >
    > accepted ;)
    >
    >>>allegedly(!) both testking and transcender somehow manage to compile
    >>>practice tests that mirror the actual exams literally word-for-word on
    >>>many questions. they often match both the questions and answers even to
    >>>the extent of using the exact same names of the companies, servers,
    >>>databases, etc used in the case studies! how could they possibly do that
    >>>unless they used brain dumps or similar tactics that contravened the
    >>>NDAs?

    >>
    >> Obviously I can't vouch for all of Trancender's exams, since there's a
    >> lot of exams out there, and obviously even more study exams. All I can
    >> pass on is general consensus, and that consensus is that Trancender's are
    >> not br@in dumps. If you have other first-hand experience, then it would
    >> place this in doubt. I'm just surprised that a company with the brand
    >> name and presence of Trancenders would do something like that. They are
    >> an American-based company, and as such, would be much more accessible to
    >> Microsoft's legal teams than makers of exam simulations that are
    >> overseas.

    >
    > suprised? i was knocked off my feet!
    >
    > the thing is, the NDA only says its illegal to disclose what's in the
    > exam, not that it's illegal for a company to trawl the web for brain dump
    > type data and compile a practice test/Qs from it (as far as i know), or
    > illegal to _use_ such practice tests to prepare.
    >
    > i think this could even be taken as far as saying that the dedicated brain
    > dump web sites are not illegal either (but i'm no legal expert)! surely
    > the only lucidly illegal persons are those whom disclose what was in the
    > exam in the first instance (eg disclosing to a brain dump web site after
    > sitting an exam). if they _were_ illegal, i suggest we'd have heard by
    > now of microsoft taking these brain dump site people to court, wouldn't
    > we?
    >
    > this (if true) would also go some way to explain why microsoft are
    > conspicuously avoiding defining exactly what is legal and what isn't, or
    > which material providers are illegal/legal, or why they're 'recommending'
    > some providers over others. think about it ...if microsoft were to tell
    > everyone that it's not actually illegal to use a brain dump (or practice
    > tests that appear to be based on them), nobody would think twice about
    > using them and the quality of the cert would be substantially reduced.
    >
    > i also think that people 'in the know', eg those who actually work for
    > microsoft, etc all know that the above is true and purposely avoid the
    > contentious issue in fear of letting people know the truth, or upset their
    > employer/peers.
    >
    > of course, this is all speculation and hard to prove either way. and so
    > it's left to continue unchallenged...
    >
    >> Sometimes I, and other MCNGP may be a bit over-zealous when we see these
    >> kinds of posts. Most of us do indeed try to give people the benefit of
    >> the doubt, some of us can be like pit bulls.

    >
    > can you tell me a bit about this MCNGP thing? does it stand for "Mean
    > Certified News Group Poster" as described in MCP Magazine article
    > <http://www.mcpmag.com/columns/article.asp?EditorialsID=396>, which
    > describes you guys and gals as follows:
    >
    > "[...] a group of trolls claiming to hold the MCNGP (Mean Certified News
    > Group Poster) certification have established their own little fiefdom. Woe
    > to the individual who posts to that newsgroup unaware of the evils that
    > lurk there -you will be flamed."
    >
    > reading that, you'd be forgiven for thinking MCNGP is a new microsoft
    > certification, yet i can't find any reference to it on microsoft.com!
    >
    > mcngp.co.uk uses the "®" (or "(R)") character to claim a Registered Trade
    > Mark is held (eg MCNGP®). do you know who owns this? or is it also a
    > part of the general attempt at humour that seems to underly the group? is
    > it all meant to be taken with humour, or are you MCNGPs honestly expecting
    > people to take you seriously in these newsgroups?
    >
    > i've visited the mcngp.com and mcngp.co.uk web sites, but suprisingly, the
    > site's faq does not explain what the letters stand for (i found it to be
    > empty).
    >
    >>>i think it's quite shameful of microsoft to avoid such a poignant
    >>>subject.

    >>
    >> Again, after having talked to various MS employees myself, I better
    >> understand their position in this. In some ways, their hands are tied.
    >> It's not that they're doing nothing about it, they are. Unfortunately,
    >> it takes time, and clever legal strategies.

    >
    > can you ellaborate further? exactly who (or what dept) did you talk to
    > about it and what is this action you say they're doing?
    >
    >>>>By the way, there are no MVP's in certification, only Microsoft
    >>>>technologies and applications to my knowledge.
    >>>
    >>>forgive me, for i don't understand what it is you're trying to say here.

    >>
    >> I think your original post asked for an MVP to reply. I was merely
    >> commenting that their are no MVP's in certification, only in technologies
    >> like VB, Excel, etc. I mean, you might still value a reply from an MVP
    >> higher (like Mr. Bittman) but an MVP does not necessarily have any
    >> experience in certification. Joseph does, but that's not what his MVP is
    >> in. At the same time, I got my first certification (from MS, anyway)
    >> when Joseph was eleven years old, and I was a very late starter in
    >> certification.

    >
    > interesting. so is it pretty meaningless to put "MVP" in your usenet name
    > or signature w/out qualifying it w/ the subject it's for, eg "MVP-Excel"?
    >
    > thank you for an interesting and useful conversation :)
    >
    > regards,
    > mark
    Joseph Bittman MVP MCSD, Mar 24, 2006
    #9
    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. |{evin
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    2,300
    Dmitry Korolyov
    Jul 14, 2003
  2. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Frisbee=AE_MCNGP?=

    Re: Why the heck we should not cheat??

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Frisbee=AE_MCNGP?=, Jul 10, 2003, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    857
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Frisbee=AE_MCNGP?=
    Jul 10, 2003
  3. Consultant
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    901
    Gary - US
    Jul 13, 2003
  4. Kendal Emery
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    4,481
    Kendal Emery
    Jul 16, 2003
  5. Patrick
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,866
    Petter Børkeeiet
    Jul 10, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page