Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2012 Archives by date, by thread · List index

 The whole certification issue is caused by people without
technical knowledge passing judgement on things they do not know
about.  Again, who certifies the certifiers, and at what point does it

Ok, so abolish all the universties, government regulators etc.

So you see yourself as a sovereign ruler, don't you?

Hardly, just a logical extension but re-reading what you wrote perhaps we
are at cross-purposes - if you meant that no-one in the tdf is qualified,
that could be true I have no way of knowing.

 You simply can't
be content to put out a product that people are willing to pay for?

I am, but I'm an assessment professional so for me the products we put out
for people to pay for are qualifications. I don't see a lot of people
queing up to pay for LO or indeed any FOSS software.

Precisely the bureaucratic mindset I am railing against!  Who are
*you* to bestow the label of "competent" on someone when you are not
paying them?

That's easy, I'm usually doing it on behalf of the tax payer through
goverment accredited status. In the private sector, employers pay us to
quality assure their staff. As I said, our certification strategy is
considerably different to the tdf's and predates tdf by several years.

 Justify your own compentence to make these judgements,
just like a diagnostic test manufacturer must demonstrate the validity
of a particular procedure for classifying those with illness X, and
those without.

We are accredited by the UK government and endorsed by the Sector Skills
Council for IT and Business. I have a Masters in Education Management and
about 20 years experience in consultancy including school inspections.
 However decisions are not usually based on a single person's view.

Besides, there are other reasons for certification than simple quality
Governments like to know public money is spent on training leading to
clear outcome, people like to have official recognition. If there is
demand there is no reason not to provide.

I do not want to turn this into a political discussion.  Suffice it to
say, I do not see any need to deal with government entities in my own
business dealings unless they are imposed upon me.  Government
agencies and employees are not my clients, if I can help it.

Fine, so you need a different business model but why prevent other people
from pursuing theirs?

there, done that, won't do it again.  Let some third party ecosystem
sprout up and handle government needs.

I guess you could say we are doing that. Quite happy to carry on doing it
independently, I was simply saying that the overall strategy for open
source projects is sound since it provides a means of financing development
without having to buy licenses, Having professional knowledge and
experience does help though ;-)

 That is outside the scope of
the LO project, which is the code and documentation.

Since this is a marketing list and that is wider than code and
documentation I'd say you view of the scope is too narrow. You have a
particular perspective but it isn't the only community perspective.

No-one is forcing anyone to be certificated. It's up to each individual to
decide whether it is or is not cost-beneficial to them.


Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) +44 (0)1827 305940

The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.