compulsory accreditation (was Re: [Linux-aus] Interview with Mark Lloyd from ACS ...)

[Stewart Smith]

On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 14:38 +1000, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
> At 2006/9/29 14:15+1000  Brenda Aynsley writes:
> > 
> > ah so you're saying registration of IT practitioners is not a good thing 
> > no matter who is the registering authority because it means some sort of 
> > peer review of capabilities which therefore undermines the contribution 
> > that people can make?
> 
> Open source development relies on the peer review of the actual
> contribution.  If you have peer review of what is actually
> contributed, peer review of what capabilities you think the
> contributor may have becomes a lot less relevant.
> 
> It doesn't matter so much what people are theoretically capable of,
> but what they actualy deliver. Open Source development reviews what
> they deliver, registration techniques review what they are a capable
> of.
> 
> I think registration/qualifications are useful measure for potential
> employers and people wanting to contract work out. I just think that
> downsides of *mandatory* registration outweigh the benefits.


Very well put Chris.

I totally agree and have been trying to find a good way to put it and
you've beaten me to it.
-- 
Stewart Smith (stewart at linux.org.au)
Committee Member, Linux Australia

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20060929/e76f866e/attachment-0001.pgp