Amazingly, one of our own…a Securus Global person is about to become a member, (we hope…..) of the Australian Computer Society.
“We hope”..because that is the only way he can work as an IT person in Australia and get his visa approved. (I hope this post does not delay him). With all the posts here regarding the ACS, I never clicked that a new “Australian” IT person, MUST ALSO, become a member of the ACS, as part of visa acceptance. (My fault…I just did not assume that that stupidity would extend to mandatory “membership”).
So now, we will have a member of the ACS as part of Securus Global……if they accept his credentials to be good enough to work here with us. Who knows, we may learn some things. 
Phil Argy, who I find a good bloke to chat with and who, to his credit, will respond here, will probably/hopefully present a case as to why all new Australians must become a member of the ACS….but I cannot see it ACS myself and you know me Phil.
———————————————————————————————-
Securus Global: IT Security, Penetration Testing, Security Assessments, PCI Compliance, Product Assurance, QualysGuard, Security Strategy, Vulnerability Assessment.
Hello Jay
Repeating the same erroneous statements and referring to the same Stan Beer article with the same Edward Mandla quote as I’ve already explained won’t trigger a different response.
I guess if you don’t understand my responses I can’t help you.
Meanwhile, thanks for the benefit of your closing assumption and its metaphorical howler
Hi everyone! I am a re-joined ACS member in Qld. I too have questioned the value proposition of ACS membership, but instead of whinging (i.e “complaining pevishly”) about it, I have decided to get involved and do something about it.
This blog post starts out saying “because that is the only way he can work as an IT person in Australia and get his visa approved.” … “that a new “Australian” IT person, MUST ALSO, become a member of the ACS, as part of visa acceptance.”
I have found this to be not true. Period. I opened this link https://www.acs.org.au/index.cfm?action=show&conID=contactskill and phoned (02)9290-3422. This is the dialogue.
Me : Do I have to be a member of the ACS to do a Skills Assessment?
ACS: No.
Me : Is it cheaper for me to do a Skills Assessment if I am a member of the ACS?
ACS: Only if you are a professional level Member.
Me : Why is it cheaper if I’m a professional level member?
ACS: There’s less work involved in doing the assessment of a professional level ACS member, and the fees for the assessment service are roughly related to the work needed to perform the assessment.
Me : Why is there less work involved, just because I’m a professional member?
ACS: Because your skills will have already been assessed in order to become a professional member of the ACS.
Me : So the skills assessment is cheaper for ACS members, but after paying for Membership of the ACS, the total cost will be higher than just doing the assessment alone withont becoming a member?
ACS: Yes.
Me : So will becoming a member of the ACS help me to get a Visa?
ACS: No.
Me : Thank you for your time.
If you have any productive suggestions on how the ACS could make this clearer on their web-site under either the Skills Assessment Main, FAQ or Cost & Charges pages, I welcome your input. I will then make sure that your feedback is received by those that have the power to act upon it. I cannot promise that “they” will act, but I will lobby your constructive criticism.
FYI – a colleague of mine’s wife went through this process under the same misconception and he is very dirty at the ACS because of it.
If there is a general misconception that someone MUST be a member of the ACS in order to apply for a ICT related work visa in Australia, then it MUST be made clear the ACS Memberships is NOT mandatory!
Phil – I see your response for what it is – a pitiful attempt at deflection and a personal attack without contributing a shred of substance to the discussion. And I’d like to point out that not once did I attack you verbally. Not once. So now I feel somewhat justified in telling you to piss off.
If you are not going to actually contribute, everyone would be better off if YOU didn’t post here. All you post are transparent attempts at selling the ACS rather than responding to points or concerns, you respond to obvious flamebait and seem to only exist to provoke other people.
If your intention is/was to legitimately defend the ACS, then they are better off without your efforts here.
I’ll leave you with a quote then I’m done responding to you:
“Arguing over the Internet is running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you’re still retarded.”
QLD ACSer – Nice bit of feedback there, worth taking on board. Shame that the onus falls onto individual having to know _precisely_ what questions to ask rather than rely on honest advertising. I mean we have laws against this sort of things in the first place.
Having gone through the bother of immigration myself however, chasing up this sort of crap is the last thing on your mind as anyone who has immigrated would agree. This sort of crap is just another layer of complexity most people can’t be f**ked dealing with so they just pay the money and move on.
The more I think about, the more I think think that this is deliberate. Phil’s answers show they have no intention of trying to disuade this view. Otherwise they would just update the FAQ and move on.
Cheers Jay! If I can get the following two questions onto the FAQ page, will you /consider/ joining the ACS?
Q: Do you need to become a member of the ACS in order to apply for an ICT related Skills Assessment or Australian Working Visa for the ICT industry?
A: No.
Q: Will not being a Member of the ACS affect the result of a Skills Assessment performed by the ACS in a material way?
A: No.
I think if this was done by the ACS that this petty debate would be over, and hopefully many of the needed ICT-skilled Immigrants entering the country could choose to join or not; based on their own perceived value proposition.
Then the ACS could get on with the mission of creating value for the hard-earned the its members pony up.
I’ll do my best to make this FAQ stuff happen, and all I ask is that you all consider reconsidering becoming an ACS member.
Cheers!
Qld ACSer.
Jay has now twice demonstrated his inability or unwillingness to understand my earlier responses. It’s why he thinks they’re not substantive responses. Oh dear.
QLD ACS member, Please identify yourself, you have broken your internal non democratically elected directors instructions that you cant speak out, only your autocratic appointed president is allowed to..Without consultation I might add.
Apart from some obvious short comings of the ACS, do you honestly believe that people would join a group that is self serving in pushing their own agendas?, that do not have democratically elected representation at the branch or national level. You guys are starting to sound like “nationalists” there was a guy in Europe like that last century probably apt for the way the ACS is represented. or is “supremacist” a better term for your group?
@Tony
“nationalist”, “supremacist”. Far too kind.
I once heard a gentleman down at the pub use a word, a highly descriptive word, beginning with the letter “A”, containing the letters “RSE” and ending in “HOLES”.
I have no idea whether or not the gentleman was referring to the the non-democratically elected directors of the ACS…. Then again, he may have ! And who am I to argue ?
To be fair and answer your question mate, awhile back Phil made the comment along the lines of “if you don’t like it why don’t you join and do something about it.” I actually thought about it long and hard, wondering if I should. I initially said no and my reasons were sound, but I actually started to reconsider my previous position. That may not be a popular comment around these parts, but there it is and I really don’t care what others think. But in anycase, my time is full and so I stood my grounds.
But recent events have really made me reconsider that position, and consider the ethics of such an organisation and could I wilfully be a part of it? Phil’s last round of comments at me were really put me off and was the final nail in the coffin for me. I know not all members are like him but given the ethics I’ve seen displayed so far, my guess is the fish rots from the head down.
I doubt I will ever become a member now – not by my choice. And if they get their way and somehow make it so that we all have to become members like we’re bound to some sort of Mafia-style union if we want the work, then I can assure you it won’t be my money paying for the membership. I’ll make sure my employer foots the bill.
Sorry – last post was me. I meant it to address Qld ACS Member.
A sliver of integrity – there may be hope yet
I thought I was being impersonated!
If ACS did not make the ludicrous claims it has over years and was more clear in their ‘marketing’ they’d probably not be the target they are. No pro ACS responses here do anything to make this dying dinosaur an attractive proposition to me. Let’s face it ACS, you’re a glorified interest group at best that does some paid work given Government can’t be bothered to create an alternative. Phil, tell us more about what the CPA did to you guys when you tried to make big claims comparing yourselves to them. That’s one you have avoided so far.
Lol. Clearly “Qld ACS member” is not me. He only has a little “m”ember.
Plus, I haven’t included a web-site in any of my blog entries, yet they did. There sure must be a bit of history here that I’m unaware of!
I was a student ACS member back in the mid-nineties, but quickly found that I personally needed the $X00 a year more, given that my first job was only paying me $22,500/year. There was no value in ACS membership for me at that point in time.
10 years down the track, I went back to uni to do a Masters degree, self funded. My focus had shifted from survival needs and wanting a high paying job to career development and being a “professional”. Have a read of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional, but please don’t assume that “is a member of a vocation” implies _having_ to be a member of the ACS. It seems that some here read alternate meanings into things sometimes.
The ACS offers many varied avenues to connect with peers to network, learn from and share knowledge with. Most of these are free for members and there are some really good professional development opportunities that are offered at discount prices too. Also as a member you’re putting your hand up / on your heart / on a bible / etc and committing to uphold the ACS Code of Ethics. From what I’ve read on this thread, Mr Argy has done this IMHO. I couldn’t say the same about others here. “Honest, forthright and impartial”? Phil = yes, some others here = fail. Look up any definition of being a professional and you will find that professional ethics is explicitly included.
Living in Japan taught me that everything in the world can be improved upon and that nothing worthwhile comes easily. I accept that the ACS has its flaws, but I am trying to do something about them. However even today, with the flaws, I do personally derive great value as a member of the ACS. Yes, it does mean that I need give up my time, of which I am very short, just like you Jay. I work full-time, study part-time, am married and have 2 kids who are 8 & 6 y/o. Just being a member gives some level of value (i.e. see commitment to uphold the ACS Code of Ethics above); whereas being an involved member has the potential to deliver you a whole lot more value. Remember, I believe that nothing worthwhile comes easily…
I know that it will be impossible to say anything/enough here in this forum to convince some posters that there is value in ACS membership, as evidenced by their vicious and viral contributions; but hopefully what I’ve said might get some to “consider, reconsidering”.
Finally, I like to reiterate that the statement ‘that a new “Australian” IT person, MUST ALSO, become a member of the ACS, as part of visa acceptance’ is a FALSE assertion.
ACS Membership is NOT MANDATORY, as part of either a skills assessment performed by the ACS or a Visa application. If you have evidence of any misleading marketing by the ACS that purports contrary to this, please reply back with it.
You’re right about having a little member
@QLD Member, thanks for the input here. It is much appreciated. My concern is every time I mention the ACS, only Phil goes into bat for them to provide an “argument” against what is being said.
To me, as an outsider, a solution looks clear as day that maybe internal ACS people don’t see:
1. Don’t overstate what you do and who you are.
2. Don’t create “questionable” marketing and be clear in the message. Seriously, we all know that wording can make a difference and if you tell me that wording in this case was not meant to bring in new members, I would say; “Come on guys….we know what you were trying to do!”
3. Listen and take this in….sometimes there’s good stuff here that if the ACS responded positively, you’d win some fans.
4. Clear off old questions seriously (not avoid them) and admit mistakes of the past!
Only then will there be hope to get people onside.
DD
Drazen has done himself no favours publishing this blog
Drazen clearly demonstrates that he is NOT a professional, NOT bound by a CODE OF ETHICS that commits him to maintaining the confidentiality and integrity of the computer systems he manages, for the benefit of all those involved with and affected by them.
Securus Global Web site proclaims it “is well known for technical and security management expertise but most importantly for its work culture.”
From now on, the work culture of Securus Global will be known to have a propensity for accepting rumour as fact, and more importantly to give advice on topics on which there has been NO RESEARCH.
I note a recommendation for Drazen by Dane Warren of EDS:
“Drazen is a committed individual with a passion for security. He has always produced exceptional results on time and on cost. He clearly understands the business requirements for security and always delivers to those.”
I would suggest that whilst Drazen might understand the business requirements, he is hopelessly OUT OF HIS DEPTH when it comes to ETHICS.
If Drazen was a true professional, this blog would warrant a complaint to the “professional” society to which he belonged. Unfortunately not belonging to a professional society, this is not possible.
For the above reasons, in my role as a consultant, I would not be able to recommend the services of Security Global.
LOL @ someone impersonating me. Hahaha.
@Peter Griffith: Why is it when someone expresses an opinion that it is considered unprofessional? Courses for horses I guess.
@Qld ACS Member: I have my own code and my own ethics I abide by – which are consistent with other charters I adhere to
. However, I cannot in good conscience join an organisation where senior members do not abide by their own code of conduct. Therein lies the rub. You sound like an honest person and I can only hope that your membership serves you well. Maybe when more individuals like yourself represent an active leadership within the organisation I may consider joining. Again, sorry for the “impersonation” – it was inadvertent.
Peace.
I was told this was the place to come, but peace?
Why isn’t this Blog observing my daylight savings?
Must be a waste of time …
Peter Griffith… Let me be the first to congratulate you on your tirade about ethics and a personal moralistic attack at that. Isn’t it grand that we live in a democracy, where representation is selected by the people for the people, that freedom of speech is a basic human right! Your little spit in regards to what Drazen should exercise is nothing more that a suggestion of journalistic censorship where he would excersise bias in favour of a person/s or group/s, censorship I would suggest is unethical, so where does that leave you? My suggestion and my right to freedom of speech would brand you to what I wrote about before. Let me re-quote “You guys are starting to sound like “nationalists” there was a guy in Europe like that last century probably apt for the way the ACS is represented. Or is “supremacist” a better term for your group?”
Come home Peter G. All us trolls are missing you.
Powerful words but nothing there. What are you trying to say?
Stupid man.
ACS doesn’t want suggestions. They just want to argue and put down comments about themselves. The BS about wanting to listen is just for show. Come ACS, answer the questions.
Peter, didn’t you get the memo? You’re supposed to act friendly with critics.
Get them to join, and then we have the power to discipline them. A friendly email from the chairman of the discipline committee usually does the trick.
We usually manage to enrol industry commentators but something went wrong with this Drazic guy.
Peter ,
You sound a bit angry. Did Drazen not hire you for a job at one point.
ICT Professional,
Ahh the big brother approuch, suppress freedom of speech, with punishment another representation of the ACS, draconian.. It is know wonder you guys are withering on the vine, the sound and smell of death fills the air.
Phillip,
I have a couple of very straight forward questions for you. A straight answer would be appreciated, however given your responses to date, not anticipated.
You said, “The credential-vetting is performed by independent examiners”.
Question: Do you accept that the credential-vetting organised or undertaken by the ACS is by definition, not “independent”?
You said, “The ACS does not seek and never has sought mandatory membership of the ACS.”
Question: Do you accept the proposition that the placement of ACS membership information on a document used for the purposes of immigration to Australia, could potentially mislead people to believe that ACS membership might assist their immigration application ?
Peter Griffith
you’ve made some very sweeping broad brush statements about a lack of ethics, none of which directly relate to any specific factual information.
Its very easy to brand someone as unethical, as you have.
In the absence of fact, your statements are highly unethical and vulgar. In addition to branding Drazen as unethical, rather ironically, you’ve said that Drazen has “a propensity for accepting rumour as fact, and more importantly to give advice on topics on which there has been NO RESEARCH.”
Do tell, Peter Griffith, where is YOUR RESEARCH, your direct, specific FACTS to attest that Drazen, a highly respected member of the IT community, lacks ethics?
The degree of hypocrisy in your statement is abhorrent to the many of us that respect Drazen, a person who is greatly admired by many and held in the highest regard.
If the ACS had any balls about enforcing it’s own ethics policy, it is *you*, Peter Griffiths, that should be taken to task for your unethical behaviour.
Your pious pontifications make me sick, Peter Griffith.
You hypocrite.
Hello Peter,
Gees, you’re a hard man.
Given I do allow for anon posting as the ACS supports (I believe), I have to ask, are you the Peter Griffith who is or was an official of the ACS in South Australia? If so, are you providing an official ACS statement here against me or just a personal opinion in defence of your organisation?
Some could read your post to be defamatory in your statements against me. Some clarification:
- So I am not a “professional” because I don’t belong to a “professional” organisation (like the ACS)?
- I have questionable “ethics”?
Let me answer these for you assuming you are the Peter Griffith from the ACS (and if you are not, I apologise and address this just to whoever is using the name “Peter Griffith” here):
- The first point has been argued to death here and in other forums on the Internet for years in regards to who and what the ACS is and who they represent. (BorB is far from being the first to cover this). We’re yet to see a response to the question here raised many times about the circa 2004 episode where the ACS was firmly put in their place by the CPA for their questionable marketing and positioning tactics (as a “professional” organisation).
- The “ethics” question to me is highly offensive. If you took some time to read through this forum, you’ll see I have responded to any misunderstandings but at the same time, did review my position again based upon reader input here. I can assure you, I don’t need to join you in the ACS to get a lesson on ethics. It amazes that the ACS continues to make such statements (in direct and roundabout ways) that people need to come under your umbrella to be able to state they act and are ethical in business.
If this is all the ACS has left – ie; a personal attack on me to divert from the tough questions and criticisms of *some* of your approaches, knock yourself out mate. I’m pretty tough skinned. But it doesn’t do the ACS any favours.
As I mentioned in my last post, there’s a few things in my opinion the ACS could do to create a better impression of itself. I’m not sorry if those thoughts offended you.
In my world, I deal with IT professionals on many levels and in many industries and the ACS has been a talking point in recent times. I am yet to personally meet anyone, outside of my meeting with Phil and team at your Sydney offices who is overly complimentary of the organisation. The theme of discussions is always very similar to those questions and points raised here and in the other forums on the Net. And thus, I question why the ACS is more focused on arguing than listening and improving.
It seems clear to me that the ACS believes their world is right as it is, and no one should be voicing an opinion and arguing their positions against ACS activities.
If the ACS (just for itself as a group and in support of it’s members) did make the claims it did/does [to say those claims about itself only], then you would be in your rights to maintain that position, but when you make the broader claims that encompass those people not associated with you, (ie; others in our industry who choose not to be part of the ACS), then you do open yourselves up for debate such as this here and in the other forums. And, I don’t think that is unfair on the ACS.
Regards
DD
“if you don’t like it why don’t you join and do something about it.”
It’s the same reason I’m not currently in Afganistan training in an Al-Qaeda training camp trying to stop terrorism.
“if you don’t like it why don’t you join and do something about it.”
Interesting logic, that: If you don’t like it, join it.
I don’t like dog turds. Strangely, I don’t feel an overwhelming need to join a dog turd society.
Just as I haven’t joined a dog turd society, so too, I haven’t joined the ACS !
Hey guys, there’s probably going to be no immediate progress or agreements on things here. Can I ask if you do post, try to keep it civil. Analogies are one thing but lets not extreme them Upper B you lunatic. (Though you are entitled to your opinion). The points made are valid versus the old argument as Wireghoul mentioned.
So another thread among many on the Net as I keep mentioning covering the same old stuff and no doubt this will continue while the ACS continues to market itself the way it does.
Can I just add that I personally don’t care about the ACS. They are not in my critical path (most times) but there are times where they cross into what I do or what colleagues of mine do and at those times, where I think it is right, I will have my say here.
DD
Hi all again!
@Jay
Thank you for polite reply. Peace back at you.
I only re-joined the ACS in 2007 after a break of no perceived member value. That perception was my reality. As mentioned my turning point was caused by my _own_ reflection on being a professional. Nobody at the ACS says you need to be a member in order to be an ICT professional or to abide by “professional” code of ethics. However by taking up professional membership of the ACS, you are “publicly” ??? stating:
1. your desire to represent yourself as a ICT professional individual
2. your commitment to uphold the ACS Code of Ethics
3. your commitment to ongoing professional development
4. you’ve met some minimum levels of education & experience that has been assessed by the ACS.
I use “publicly”, but I’m not sure if that is the right term. I’m sorry if this offends. What I’m basically trying to say is that when someone like a prospective employer sees on your CV that you are a MACS, they can reasonably assume the 4 points I’ve listed above about you.
None of this means that you cannot state any of this about yourself, just because you are NOT a professional member of the ACS, apart from the last point of cause. You can communicate through your CV, cover letter, interview, etc that you are an ICT professional, who is ethical, and you value on-going professional development, along with your qualifications and experience. I do all of this myself. But just in case a prospective employer does value the status of ACS membership, I can also say I am. However, it is obvious that this could be a double-edged sword.
Having missed the whole “ACS is the CPA of IT” debacle of 2004, I feel that I might fan the embers by pointing out the this link:
http://www.acs.org.au/index.cfm?action=show&conID=certification
Quoting the FAQ link from this page it says:
“1. What is the ACS Certified Professional (CP) Program?
Certified Professional (CP) is designed to verify the existence of those capabilities in a professional that enable effective development, implementation and operation of ICT solutions-which is operating at the Skills Framework for the Information Age (SFIA) level 5 capability.”
Quoting http://www.sfia.org.uk/ it says:
“The Skills Framework for the Information Age (SFIA) provides a common reference model for the identification of the skills needed to develop effective Information Systems (IS) making use of Information & Communications Technology (ICT).”
Will it work? :{ Those that are old enough might remember that the CPA did not become the CPA overnight. The same goes for things like PMI and being a certified PMP.
Now, not only will someone be able to be a “Member” of the ACS, but they can be MACS CP. But there is a rub – to maintain CP status, the MACS will need to do at least 30 hours of relevant professional development, and log it via the ACS portal, EVERY YEAR.
This means that you are not only saying you VALUE continuous professional development, but you PRACTICE it too. Will this in turn be of value to employers, customers, clients and colleagues? I certainly hope so, because if they value CP status, then there is an easily identifiable “real” value proposition offered by ACS membership, if one does PRACTICE continuous PROFESSIONAL development.
Plese don’t flame _me_ too hard. I am trying to listen to the feedback here about the ACS, both good and bad. I am a new board member of the Qld ACS branch and no doubt DD has my real name/email address from what I’ve entered for each of my posts. I have taken onboard all of the constructive criticisms thus far from this thread and I will represent this as best I can.
Cred to you ACS QLD Member as a member of the ACS to post here, but most importantly, trying to understand the issues presented (along with Phil somewhat….:) and trying to see a way forward for your organisation.
That is how it should start.
Yes, I do have your details held in confidence/privacy. All verified though I doubt anyone would doubt your credentials in this forum given the positions you’ve taken.
DD
I can’t comment under my own name due to company policy as I hope you all would understand. I am the CIO of a Top 20 company in Australia as some background information on my own credentials.
I rarely comment on Beast or Buddha but I read just about everything posted and I give credit to Drazen Drazic for being able to produce this work without a hint of ethical issues whatsoever in the years I have been reading this, including the time before I was the CIO.
Never once have I seen anything that would compromise his or his company’s integrity. Securus Global is first rate Peter and I am sorry you feel that way now that your organisation has had its feeling hurt here.
I am aware of the ACS and always have been. I have never joined and have no immediate plans to join because I see no value in it to me.
Tell me, what is the value to me in my role now?
I don’t need it on my CV and I don’t look for it on the CVs of people I hire. My management team are not members to my knowledge and it has never been on the job advertisements we place as a requirement for roles in my organisation.
I believe Drazen is an ex-CIO himself so he’s more experienced than me to comment I suppose based upon years in the trade if you want look at it that way. So, if you attack his credentials ACS, you are attacking all of our credentials who are not members and dare to question you in a public forum.
I see nothing wrong in the points Drazen has raised as recommendations to you. Fair, without bias and always open to response. I note to you, he even apologised when he thought he was wrong. That says a lot about him and his ethics Peter (ACS). This seems to be in contradiction to the ACS way as presented here.
I agree also, you do yourself a large disservice ACS by biting at all comments and criticisms as opposed to asking yourself why are people saying such things about your organisation.
Everytime you want to attack, you are giving me and people such as myself in our roles, the feeling that, should you ever approach me, I would have no interest in even meeting with you.
I have over 2200 IT staff. To win me over would make a large increase in your active membership but the flow-on effect of me not promoting you and voicing my opinion to my staff is far worse to you – like a viral campaign.
It seems you really do not have that understanding based upon how you deal with people here from the Information Security industry. Arrogance and heavy-handedness is not the way to go. Drazen has already said this so I re-iterate the words of the man who you deem is not professional and has no business ethics.
I will deal with him and Securus Global anyday. They are l33t and the best haxors in the country!
(Hope the last bit makes sense to you security “dudes”)
If we are resuming rational discussion I’m happy to resume my participation.
A couple of comments have adverted to the CPA. The position is quite simple. We indicated that we wanted to position our PCP credential as the ICT analogue of the CPA. The Institute of Chartered Accountants drew to our attention that CPA was a registered trademark and asked us not to use the expression in the way that we proposed.
It’s a bit like Rolls Royce asking someone not to call their product the Rolls Royce of its category.
Next the independence of our credential examiners is challenged either because they are ACS members or because they’re paid for their effort. In the context, ‘independent’ means someone disinterested in the outcome so that their objectivity isn’t compromised. The people we use are highly respected individuals in their field who have developed a reputation for their integrity and honesty and objectivity. They have no interest politically, professionally or personally in the outcome of their role because all they do is certify or decline to certify that a person has the credentials that they claim to have. What the Department of Immigration does after that is not controlled by the ACS as the applicant still has medical and other requirments to be met which have nothing to do with ACS. That’s another reason I’m sceptial that anyone would think that becoming an ACS member enhanced their prospects of emigrating to Australia – it just doesn’t follow.
If someone could show me where we have made a statement that could be interpreted in the way that has been suggested I would seek to have it changed because we do not seek to mislead people in that way, but the only assertion made to date has been erroneous. The second citation was to Edward Mandla’s comments quoted in a Stan Beer article. I pointed out that, properly understood, this was a call for people to belong to “a” professional association – it was NOT a call for mandatory ACS membership.
If you go back and re-read my previous answers carefully you’ll see this is exactly how I answered the questions last time and I saw no reason to repeat my answers just because the questions kept getting repeated. I’m a little more hopeful now that the answers will be read sensibly and not given short shrift by any trolls that come to visit.
It also occurs to me that Drazen should not permit posts from people who do not leave an email address – it’s not published but it should be an indicator of good faith that you’re prepared to disclose your contact information to Drazen if you want to post on his blog. Whilst I personally don’t like anonymous comments on a board like this – there can be occasions where anonymity is justified to avoid persecution or bullying, but I don’t think that’s an excuse that works on this blog. But that’s a matter for Drazen – I think the credibility of the blog would be enhanced if people had to post under their real name instead of being critical behind their mask
Hey Phil,
You do respond and I like that as you know, but you do hold back a bit as you know also and I know. The ACS did get spanked down so to speak. It was pretty serious from memory – moreso than you relate here.
Also from memory, it had to do with comparisons as to what a “professional association” was. Had the ACS had that cred, I am sure the CPA would have seen it as good marketing for themselves….”Goldman Sachs…..the Rolls Royce of Investment Banking!”…you get my drift? Rolls Royce loves that type of marketing when it fits and so do others as marketing people know. Money for jam! Great for the brand! BUT, the accountants did not want to be associated with you. What does that say? That is the question we’ve been asking! Easier to admit it was a mistake, lessons learned and move on. You would have gotten more cred doing that!
In regards to people posting, it has been an issue for me. I would prefer also that there is some real names to the posts but I also don’t want to stop discussion that can add value. It’s something I am dealing with and I have no idea at present what I will do. I moderate posts as best I can for defamation and other personal type attacks and I will/do delete those but I also acknowledge a right for an opinion where people cannot use their names for various reasons (like the last “Anon”). Do you accept everything on face value? No….it is the way of the Internet as a whole.
DD
Hi Phil,
It’s been a while since I entered the country, but I’ll try to offer my side of the “membership will help” misconception(?)
When applying as a skilled independent migrant there is a points quota you have to meet to be eligible/credible. Personally I was well over the point limit (I think it was 125), especially as System Administrators were in demand. Being in demand was 10 bonus points, which at almost 10% of your point quota is substancial. Other people from uni weren’t all that close to the quota due to other things, and for them those 10 points would be crucial.
I don’t think anyone is arguing that the ACS membership will have an influence on your medical checks, but rather that it will influence the vetting process. And if a single migration agent tells a borderline client that it might help then you find yourself in this boat.
@ QLD ACS Member:
I already hold (amoungst other things) CISSP. Not to debate the technical merits of this certification but being blunt, it gets me more street cred where it counts (it is already on the emergency skills list in many countries as an FYI). If I felt a need to adhere to a set of industry recognised ethics, I can point to the ISC2 code of ethics I already abide by.
In terms of my professional and personal development I’m already a member of two other professional groups, I’m undertaking a postgraduate degree and I’m look at other certification relevant to my line of work. I’m doing research for presentations I plan on giving at internationally recognised conferences.
So, I guess my long winded point is this – why do I need an ACS membership to recognise my professional status? What value would I receive by becoming an ACS member? I am not saying the above to toot my own horn – I’m deadly serious – what’s in it for me?
The only “benefit” I can think of would be to help be a voice for the infosec community in a wider ICT industry body.
If is to just be a voice, I am doing just fine without the ACS. I’ve already written to politicians to express my views as an infosec professional in the past. It seems the weight of numbers might be an added benefit, but I get that already with the professional associations I am a member of – and on matters where it counts, it seems we’ve expressed the same opinion (as Drazen can attest to).
I look at the fact that the only real professional benefit is that I get voice, and perhaps some more hard work. No offense, but as a parent yourself I’m sure you can appreciate the merit of raising children and trying to achieve the above with only 24 hours in the day.
@Drazen:
Mate, I am all in favor of authenticated (if hidden) email access. At least it will stop me being a knucklehead and accidently impersonating someone. Heh.
@DD What is in your memory about the CPA may be the beat-up way the issue was reported. But I was President at the time and was actually involved. You decide which is likely to be the more reliable source.
Phil,
you want DD to decide between you & news reports – which is likely to be the more reliable source ?
We all know how unreliable news reports are, eh Phil ?
Here’s my vote: News reports – more reliable.
Just when I thought the trolls had gone, you go and spoil it all, Knucklehead
Phil, lets not play games. The question was directed to you (ACS). If you were the man (which I did not know), tell us then what happened and ACS perspective on it. I did not infer a “beat-up” in the way it was reported. Just that the ACS was beaten up on it. You’re playing games again to try to avoid answering this.
It’s exactly as I’ve told you (except that I was only Vice President in 2004 rather than President, but I was involved in the communications)- that’s all there was to it. We used ‘ACS – the CPA of IT’ in the tag line of a commercial, they wrote to us asking us not to do that and pointing out that CPA was a registered trademark, and we stopped using it as they requested.
It was polite and civil and we were not slapped down and there was no big deal – just a courteous exchange of letters.
So there you have it.
After unsucessfully & UNETHICALLY attempting to piggyback itself onto the multi-million dollar, worldwide brand success of the CPA, the ACS, according to Argy, engaged in a “courteous exchange of letters” followed by an immediate withdrawal from the use of the CPA brand. Pigs might fly.
The problem with Argy’s description of events is that a formal letter of demand to immediately cease & desist isn’t exactly play school. Its very serious stuff, Phil Argy knows this, which is exactly why the ACS immediately withdrew.
SLAP DOWN !!!
My recollections were that it was a bit more serious Philip but it is in the past now. Shame few lessons were learned in relation to marketing.
Has anyone asked what the ACS would provide Information Security people? I’d be very interested to know what you would put forward as your value proposition.
2004: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies-archive.cfm/241734.html
2010: BeastorBuddha
Nothing has changed.
Drazen,
Thanks for your response.
I figured if I was to attract your attention, I would have to shout loudly enough to be heard through all the noise generated from your post.
It seems to have worked.
My attention was drawn by others to this thread, I just couldn’t believe all the flame mail directed at ACS but most of all Phillip.
I don’t think it matters whether I am Peter Griffith from the ACS or not as I am not speaking for ACS, As a friend of Phillip, I am annoyed at the way you have funnelled all this emotional irrational uninformed flame mail at Phillip.
And what caused it all?
It was your original post containing inaccurate advice taken as gospel by those whom I assume are people who are Drazen followers.
So I didn’t see why you should get off the hook quite so easily after all the grief you have dropped on Phillip.
Pity you didn’t check with Phillip before publishing, but I suspect you didn’t really want to. Don’t let facts spoil a good story.
Reading your response to me, I get the feeling your post was done to give people the opportunity to flame both ACS and Phillip. Certainly that has been the result.
What if your prospective employee had been a software engineer, and had said he would have to join the IEEE(Aust). Would you have posted in a similar fashion about IEEE(Aust)?
Or been an accountant and thought he had to join the CPA or the ICAA, or been a dentist and had to join the ADA, or a System Administrator and had to join SAGE-AU, would you have published a similar blog about these organisations?
The ethical problem I see is after reading what you are prepared to publish, I wonder about the accuracy of the advice you might give to your clients if you happen to be asked about ACS or even other professional organisations.
All the flame mail that has been generated is a result of your original post, you must take some blame rather than handball it on to Phillip. To simply leave Phillip as the target for all the rednecks who seem happy to rely on urban myths rather than fact is not my idea of how to treat colleagues. Incidentally I am not going to respond to emotional irrational flames which you seem to expect Phillip to do.
I look at some of the responses which only seem to emphasise why Government, Industry and even CIOs like yourself don’t take the people who work in ICT seriously.
PG
Ps I think an apology to Phillip for the unwarranted attention your blog has caused for him would be the least you could do.
Peter,
You are soo full of it. Redneck? hmmm
I can’t believe the arguments here. I do not like the ACS and I know a lot of people that have posted… But on both sides of the fence pro and anti ACS…. Your posts sound like a bunch of kindergarten boys having a fight in the school yard.
Miranda,
Makes for good reading and laughing heartedly