BSCI tommorow {update: PASSED 977}

mikearama

Nice find Mike.

So for all you dumpers... that's what it looks like to take responsibility for your actions. I readily admitted that my school (CDI College) handed out **** when I went there back in 2000, and I used them.

Anyone else? deezul? Or are you still contending that you can get 2 wrong with 33 minutes left legitimately?

networker050184

mikearama wrote:

Nice find Mike.

So for all you dumpers... that's what it looks like to take responsibility for your actions. I readily admitted that my school (CDI College) handed out **** when I went there back in 2000, and I used them.

Anyone else? deezul? Or are you still contending that you can get 2 wrong with 33 minutes left legitimately?

Give it up. Some people are smarter than you. Face the facts.

Slowhand

mikearama wrote:

Nice find Mike.

So for all you dumpers... that's what it looks like to take responsibility for your actions. I readily admitted that my school (CDI College) handed out **** when I went there back in 2000, and I used them.

Anyone else? deezul? Or are you still contending that you can get 2 wrong with 33 minutes left legitimately?

Honestly, this is what I see. You used to **** your exams, passing with little or no problems. Now, you're studying and you're finding out how difficult these things are. You see others study the same amount of time you do, but pass with higher scores, and it stings. At this point, you're really only trying to start rumors and run and inquisition based solely on the 'feeling' that a person can't do that well on an exam.

At this point, you're backed into a corner after lashing out at "all the dumpers", trying to accuse the whole world of cheating. It's childish, it's petty, and it's quite sad. If someone cheats, they will most likely pay for it in the end when they're asked to back up their cert with work. Running a witch-hunt to try to smear your collegues and fellow TechExams members is disrespectful and downright rude. If you have some proof, then by all means, produce it. As for me, I'm done with you. Let the accusations fly, let the conspiracy-theories run rampant. Just like the dumpers, you'll more than likely face the consequences of your actions, in the end.

nel

Whats the big deal if the original poster scored 977 anyway? a pass is a pass? i wouldnt be jealous if someone scored higher than me - plenty have

Essendon

I am quite surprised that MikeJ hasnt locked this thread already. Mud-slinging match eh?

There are plenty of schools that hand out **** and so many people "recommend" them. People who do use **** eventually get found out like this guy at my company, he recently "got" his MCSE 2003 in 6 weeks!! He doesnt admit cheating, but the other day he was asking us if a email distribution group is a security group or a distribution group. A couple of weeks ago he came over to confirm what groups can access DHCP. So you see if you didnt admit it, it very easily shows, no matter how much you try to hide it.

BTW, so many people, even on these forums, get very high scores, Paul Boz is a standout example, he commonly gets 950+ scores (there are many many others too) and I can guarantee that they didnt **** their way through, simply because they know their ****.

lildeezul, congratulations mate, well done.

mikearama, chill dude, your in a corner but you still cannot stop accusing people getting high scores simply because you scored "well" by dumping your way through. And dont post here again.

dynamik

Essendon wrote:

BTW, so many people, even on these forums, get very high scores, Paul Boz is a standout example, he commonly gets 950+ scores

I've been thinking about him this whole time (Um, in a completely non-romantic way. Well, mostly ). He's aced at least one pro-level exam and was in the high-900s on his BSCI/BCMSN composite as well as all his others. He clearly knows his stuff.

I'm not sure if it's fair to attack Mike's intelligence over this though; that seems a bit like sinking to his level. It's not simply an issue of one person being smarter than another. Study habits, amount of time studying, etc. all play an important role in one's performance on an exam.

Back on topic, I don't even make a habit of following lildeezul's posts, and I've seen him give good advice and ask solid questions. It was obvious he genuinely wanted to learn the material. I see no reason to believe he cheated. At this point Mike, it really seems like you're just trying to stick to you guns and save face instead of legitimately caring whether he cheated or not.

Slowhand

dynamik wrote:

I've been thinking about him this whole time (Um, in a completely non-romantic way. Well, mostly ).

Ri-ight. Purely platonic, I'm sure.

nel

I've been thinking about him this whole time (Um, in a completely non-romantic way. Well, mostly icon_redface.gif)

Must be love...LOVE LOVE ...DUH DUH

mikearama

dynamik wrote:

I'm not sure if it's fair to attack Mike's intelligence over this though; that seems a bit like sinking to his level. It's not simply an issue of one person being smarter than another. Study habits, amount of time studying, etc. all play an important role in one's performance on an exam.

You are, as always, the voice of reason. I get the impression that slowhand enjoys slinging it as well... he's not shy with the name-calling.

As for the exam, it's really "not simply an issue of one person being smarter"... it's also entirely a psychology exam. Anyone who's taken it will appreciate the trickiness of the wording, the closeness of possible answers, and the material that just isn't covered in ciscopress material. Anyone, IMO, who can be done the exam with 33 minutes left, didn't need to think about the content and reason their way through the tricky wording... never mind only getting a couple wrong.

dynamik wrote:

Back on topic, I don't even make a habit of following lildeezul's posts, and I've seen him give good advice and ask solid questions. It was obvious he genuinely wanted to learn the material. I see no reason to believe he cheated. At this point Mike, it really seems like you're just trying to stick to you guns and save face instead of legitimately caring whether he cheated or not.

I see this one mentioned a few times... giving good advice and asking solid questions. I'm surprised that this is used 'defensively', since as much as no one wants to admit that 977 and 33 minutes left is indicative of "knowing more than you're supposed to", giving advice and asking questions is certainly not proof of not visiting less than favourable exam prep sites.

Ya know, all things considered, I have been trying to stick to my guns, since nothing anyone has said shakes off my initial gut reaction that it just isn't possible... however, this was a mistake. It was a neat experience to see everyone band together to play the game, and to see how quickly I became the target... particularly you, slowhand... you're all class.

So, hit me one more time with your best... I'm ready.

malcybood

talk about immature.....give it a rest.

this thread has been completely ruined from it's initial content and is becoming tedious.

AlexMR

mikearama, I think you are not completely off but you are off. You have to understand that there are really smart people, and there are people with really bad cognitive abilities who understand their limitations and study harder than everybody else and get impressive results. You are underestimating both kinds of persons.

Here in my country there is a Cisco academy that is supposedly suggesting **** to people. I almost downloaded one until I came here to ask about their greatness and everyvody told me it was illegal and I could have my certification cancelled or be banned for life if I used illegal training material. I tell you this because I believe the amount of **** being use is underestimated on the forums in general, but the information you are using to get to that conclusion is simply flawed.

There are very smart people. There are very smart committed people who get some impressive results. The fact that it takes you several re-reads to understand some wording of a question doesnt mean there are NOT lots and lots of people who can probably finish the last few words of the same question (like a "complete the sentence" exercise) by reading it once.

Accusing somebody based exclusively because he attained something that according to YOUR capability is impossible, is not the biggest demonstration class that you are going to give. That is for sure.

dynamik

mikearama wrote:

You are, as always, the voice of reason.

Hey man, my dislike of baseless accusations even applies to people I disagree with

And honestly, with the exception of this thread, I typically enjoy your posts and think you share a lot of good information

I'm with malcy, at this point, it's best to just agree to disagree. Everyone has gotten a chance to express their views (don't succumb to his final provocation Slowhand! ), and it's only going to get more negative and personal from here on out.

I feel that the lesson here is to simply hold back these types of accusations unless there is real evidence. I'm pretty sure everyone was a bit skeptical of his integrity after seeing his results (no offense lildeezul). However, when there is no other evidence besides "doing well," you really can't put together a genuine argument. Believe it or not, we all detest cheaters as much as you do, but I think that "innocent until proven guilty" doctrine applies here at TE as well.

Nothing will ever come from something like this. People will make accusations, the accused will deny them, people will side with one side or the other, and tempers will flare. It's just a waste of everyone's time and drops a load of negativity on an otherwise pleasant and upbeat forum. If he indeed cheated, he's mainly hurting himself, so it's kind of odd that we're expending so much energy arguing over this.

mikej412

Out of the many lame dumper excuses for cheating, one is that the exam to too hard to pass without "help."

And some people need to morally justify their cheating by believing that everyone else cheats.