Re: Database Design

On 2004-01-08, Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote:
> Galen Boyer wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004, damorgan_at_x.washington.edu wrote:
>>
>>
>>>But the point, hopefully, is made.
>>
>> No, the point has been lost.
>
> Apparently not on others.
>
> I don't see anybody talking about
>> credentials and how judging and scoring is supposed to come
>> about. And this is what struck me to even respond in the first
>> place. There were a few people waxing on poetically (you being
>> one) about how important our industry is while we have no
>> credentials. Well, tell me how the flip anybody can devise a
>> plan for credentials that you and most others won't immediately
>> then turn around on and say, "Experience wins over accreditation
>> ..." or other such slams.
>
> Do you believe that about the practice of medicine? law? engineering?
> pharmacy? Do you believe a professional society examining and certifying
> its own members is impossible? I sure hope not.
>
> Well given that others can do it why don't you think we can? Not enough

Having known (or being subjected to) a fair number of Physicians, Engineers and Lawyers I will be the first one to laugh at the notion that professional certifications are sufficient.

They simply are not. There are far too many shysters practicing in the fields that already have strong certification procedures.

Unless you want some permanent harm to come to yourself it is in your own best interests not to take basic professional certifications at face value. There is a great variation in quality amongst lawyers and doctors and no apparent desire from the profession as a whole to root out the shysters.

[deletia]

-- 
There's no reason not to contribute to the stone soup if those    |||
contributions are not critical to your competitive edge.         / | \