GroupStudy.com GroupStudy.com - A virtual community of network engineers
 Home  BookStore  StudyNotes  Links  Archives  StudyRooms  HelpWanted  Discounts  Login
Re: NLI R&S volume 7 Lab posted 10/03/2007
[Chronological Index] [Thread Index] [Top] [Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]


It was good drama, either way. Airing things publicly gets them moving along
quickly. It is not always a bad thing if you got ripped off (not saying
anyone did). It was a fun read. I got ripped off by an organization for a
lot of money. I plan to print out signs, and picket their business, driving
their customers away, and get it on the news :) Publicity can be a great
thing when your trying to solve a problem that is not getting solved.

DR

On 10/3/07, Eric Dobyns <eric_dobyns@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I feel compelled to speak on this thread; I apologize for reopening a
> wound
> and I agree with Gary, this is getting tedious.  IMHO, none of this should
> have been broadcast on a public forum.  This is private business between
> NLI
> and the parties involved.
>
> I don't know the details of what happened between Narbik and Victor and
> NLI/ccbootcamp.  I was fortunate enough to attend a couple of bootcamps at
> NLI when Narbik was teaching and I met Victor while there.  Narbik is one
> of
> the best instructors I have ever had for ANY subject.  He could teach my
> dog
> how to implement BGP.  Although I don't know Victor well, he seemed like a
> great guy when I met him.  I know for a fact that Narbik is always there
> with advice to his current and former students and I respect him greatly.
>
> I am sorry that the business relationship between NLI/Brad Ellis soured
> with
> Narbik and Victor.  I don't know why it happened, but NLI certainly lost
> some good people in the process.  That said, I am sure Brad will find (or
> has found) good replacements.
>
> The people involved (Brad, Victor and Narbik) are real people with
> feelings.
> I don't know why Darby felt the need to intervene publicly and broadcast
> this issue, but I don't think it helps Victor, Narbik or NLI.  I really
> can't believe he did that.  He annoyed the heck out of the rest of us and,
> intentionally or not, gave a bad impression of Narbik, Victor, Brad and
> NLI,
> which is based solely on rumour.  It's a private matter that should have
> stayed private between the individuals involved.
>
> For my part, I want everyone to know that regardless of what has been
> said,
> I know first hand that Narbik is a great instructor who takes a genuine
> interest in his students, long after the class is over.  You could not ask
> for a better instructor.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Gary
> Duncanson
> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2007 10:22 AM
> To: Darby Weaver
> Cc: ccielab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; swm@xxxxxxxxxx; vcappuccio@xxxxxxxxx; Narbik
> Kocharians
> Subject: Re: NLI R&S volume 7 Lab 3
>
> Guys
>
> Can we knock all this off please? It's getting really bloody tedius.
>
> TIA
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Darby Weaver" <darbyweaver@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Darby Weaver" <darbyweaver@xxxxxxxxx>; "Narbik Kocharians"
> <narbikk@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "Scott Morris" <swm@xxxxxxxxxx>; "Victor Cappuccio"
> <vcappuccio@xxxxxxxxx>; <Jay.Hanke@xxxxxxxxxx>; <ccielab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2007 4:10 PM
> Subject: Re: NLI R&S volume 7 Lab 3
>
>
> > All and Narbik,
> >
> > For the record, I have reviewed the email chain and
> > had a chance to review it in the daylight hours.
> >
> > 1. Narbik - you are wrong - the email where you
> > "jokingly - I hope" mentioned buying copyright
> > materials (NLI specifically) and giving them away was
> > published to GS by you and not by me. It is in this
> > email where you mentioned not getting paid by NLI for
> > workbooks, etc. and then changed your story and blamed
> > me for publishing the email to GS.  Please review your
> > sent emails.  I did review mine.  This is a very
> > serious statement and one which I do not condone.  In
> > the same email you mentioned for the second time about
> > your class in Las Vegas and also told Victor you would
> > check with FastLane about the CCSI thing.
> >
> > 2. I asked questions based on the information given -
> > Sorry, it's what I do if something seems not quite
> > right.  Brad wrote me and asked me to stay out of it,
> > since each person's situation was and is different.  I
> > was concerned since I did recommend Victor to consider
> > employment initially with Brad and NLI.  But again,
> > the questions have been raised and I understand their
> > is now a dialog occurring in private where it should
> > be.
> >
> > 3. I do not appreciate Narbik implying that I
> > published his private emails that were unicast - I did
> > not and wish the record to be clear on the matter.  As
> > far as I can tell Victor did not either.  It looks to
> > be a simple mistake where Narbik, himself, replied to
> > all - and ccielab@xxxxxxxxxx happened to be on the
> > recipient list.  A simple misunderstanding.  I did not
> > write those words and do not wish to take credit for
> > someone even implying buying a vendor's works and then
> > publishing them publicly and for spite or revenge.
> > This is not my character and I am not happy that
> > Narbik thinks I would have deliberately published or
> > replied to this line of reasoning.
> >
> > 4. For the record, Victor, the author of his own
> > works, may or may not choose, to introduce those works
> > to the public domain, however, I think he has been
> > very careful to ensure he does not confuse what is
> > copyright and what is not.  Look carefully.
> >
> > 5. I do think a lot of people's character came out of
> > this and if one really cares one would follow-up.  And
> > by the way, for Brad's part, he did respond
> > professionally at least to me unicast, I would think
> > he has done the same to the other parties of this
> > email.
> >
> > 6. Finger-pointing is not a skill required for the
> > CCIE Lab.  We are all adults and one should never say
> > in email anything that is not to be repeated.  We
> > should also be careful whatever we write in email,
> > especially with such statements that can be quite
> > badly sent and received.
> >
> > 7. Sorry to all bystanders for this public display -
> > however, given I felt like I was becoming a scapegoat
> > by a known and reputable CCIE Trainer for making
> > copyright materials public - I felt I should clear the
> > air and be very clear, that I did agree with Victor,
> > that any materials created by Victor, and NOT paid for
> > or owned by anyone else could be made public domain
> > and thus invalidate their future sale value, IF Victor
> > felt he needed to go that route.  I also think it was
> > in poor taste for a notable instructor, a creator of
> > notable copyright materials, to even make such a
> > statement in private or even if joking.  However, the
> > statement was made and not by myself or Victor.
> >
> > 8. As near as I can tell, NLI had not published for
> > sale any labs so far that were unpaid for as of yet by
> > Victor.
> >
> > 9. I think that wraps it up for my part.  Trust me, I
> > do not like my words to ever be confused for what I
> > did and did not say.
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html