Re: To cheat, or not to cheat?

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

"Mark" <" <sorry, don't want any spam!> wrote in message
news:OeARhgzTGHA.5884@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
i wasn't trying to start a discussion about individuals' ethics. nor was
i asking whether or not you think i should use brain dumps. i was
attempting to discover the definitive rules governing the use of various
'practice tests' eg testking, transcender, etc (as they appear to be based
on brain dumps).

perhaps i could have chosen a less equivocal subject line for my original
posting. maybe something like "TestKing, Transcender == Cheating?".
appologies. i should have known better :/

Apologies for mis-understanding your intentions. Usually, when someone
posts something along the lines that you have, they are considering using
br@indumps. For what it's worth, we get a lot of those kinds of posts, and
usually I don't feel the need to take the time to even reply, at least not
at length, but yours was intelligently composed, I thought, so it was worth
my time to reply.

allegedly(!) both testking and transcender somehow manage to compile
practice tests that mirror the actual exams literally word-for-word on
many questions. they often match both the questions and answers even to
the extent of using the exact same names of the companies, servers,
databases, etc used in the case studies! how could they possibly do that
unless they used brain dumps or similar tactics that contravened the NDAs?

Obviously I can't vouch for all of Trancender's exams, since there's a lot
of exams out there, and obviously even more study exams. All I can pass on
is general consensus, and that consensus is that Trancender's are not br@in
dumps. If you have other first-hand experience, then it would place this in
doubt. I'm just surprised that a company with the brand name and presence
of Trancenders would do something like that. They are an American-based
company, and as such, would be much more accessible to Microsoft's legal
teams than makers of exam simulations that are overseas.

posters talk of certain practice test providers as being 'certified' or
'authorised' as you did, eg measureUp, Self Test, implying others like
testking and transcender are unauthorised. this is rather misleading and,
at worst, incorrect(?). i cannot find any microsoft documentation that
authorises [the use of] some providers over others. they merely appear to
be recommending MeasureUp and Self Test SW, whilst conspicuously failing
to mention all the others [example ref:
http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcpexams/prepare/]. please correct me
if i'm wrong.

No, you are correct. Just because MS only endorses two does not mean that
there are not other legit practise exams out there. Unfortunately, legal
issues prevents MS from going much further in that regard.

i don't think it would be unreasonable to assume microsoft has some
financial deal w/ certain providers to allow them to be linked from
microsoft's web site in this way. i would hope microsoft vets a
provider's material to try and discern whether they appear to have used
brain dumps to complile their material. this would explain why testking
and transcender are not 'recommended'/listed on microsoft.com.

I don't think you'd ever find MS endorsing tesking and others like them.
And yes, it's almost certainly financially related. Smaller companies,
legit ones, probably could not afford to get "endorsed."


some people get flamed for merely asking about testking! transcender
seems to have more acceptance.

The only time I would flame (at least intentionally) is if it was clear that
someone knew exactly what they were asking for. I've been reading and
posting these particular (cert-related) forums for over five years now. If
I responded to each and every post that involved br@in dumps, I'd have a
severe case of carpel-tunnel syndrome. I generally try to keep it limited
to the more thought-out posts, like yours, although I still feel a bit like
Don Quixote in that it will be lost on the vast majority of readers.
Cheating is a personal thing with me. I will try to disuade people from
cheating whenever possible, and with whatever means possible.

the 'mirroring' of the actual exams combined w/ the fact that microsoft
don't recommend the material leads to many people's inference that it's
illegal at worst, unethical at best and at least unauthorised. a novice
may go out and buy material from testking w/ no idea that they nor the
provider are doing anything unethical --as was pointed out by J Bittman.
instead of flaming such people, shouldn't these people be directed to or
provided with some sort of faq or 'best practices' info, eg from an mvp,
as it seems to be a very common query? of course, even that would be
unnecessary if microsoft were to address the issue in the first instance.

Yes, there do exist people who do not know what br@in dumps are, including
me five years ago, but then again, I would have immediately recognized by
going to one of these web sites, based on their own claims that their exams
contain "actual questions and actual answers." It doesn't take a rocket
scientist to figure out that these people are offering cheating material.
Sometimes I, and other MCNGP may be a bit over-zealous when we see these
kinds of posts. Most of us do indeed try to give people the benefit of the
doubt, some of us can be like pit bulls. What bothered me with Mr. Bittman
was his focusing on a poster's flaming, but having nothing to say about the
flamee. The language in MS's groups is filtered, so "bad words" have to be
obfuscated, but the main idea still gets through. Does it do any good?
Sometimes, yes it does. I can attest that I know of a few people who I've
swayed in the issue. Not a lot, but even if I can convince one person to
not cheat, I feel good about that.

even if transcender and testking did 'have to' use brain dump sites to
compile practice tests, it wouldn't be hard for them to obfuscate or
otherwise modify the content so the questions were more generic;
maintaining the theory/concept but removing any specifics. it appears
they're _trying_ to make their practice tests match the exam questions in
order to appeal to the less ethically motivated people.

This is correct. It would be easy for them. But they do not do this
intentionally. Who would buy their stuff if it wasn't giving the potential
examinee some kind of advantage... like knowing the exact questions and
answers?

this is the crux of what seems to separate the practice test providers
into the two camps. the question is, where is the line through this grey
area drawn (in terms of legality, etc)? and who draws it/should draw it?
personally, i think microsoft should certify practice tests so that we as
consumers can make well informed judgements on what material to use and to
remove the possibility of using ignorance as an excuse for (indirectly or
otherwise) cheating.

Now that's a decent idea, however MS would have to charge money to certify
the practise tests, and I would guess that a lot of practise test developers
would not be able to afford the cost of certification of their own software.
Shame, really.

i think it's quite shameful of microsoft to avoid such a poignant subject.

Again, after having talked to various MS employees myself, I better
understand their position in this. In some ways, their hands are tied.
It's not that they're doing nothing about it, they are. Unfortunately, it
takes time, and clever legal strategies.

By the way, there are no MVP's in certification, only Microsoft
technologies and applications to my knowledge.

forgive me, for i don't understand what it is you're trying to say here.

I think your original post asked for an MVP to reply. I was merely
commenting that their are no MVP's in certification, only in technologies
like VB, Excel, etc. I mean, you might still value a reply from an MVP
higher (like Mr. Bittman) but an MVP does not necessarily have any
experience in certification. Joseph does, but that's not what his MVP is
in. At the same time, I got my first certification (from MS, anyway) when
Joseph was eleven years old, and I was a very late starter in certification.

Please don't even consider using a br@in dump to study. You say you're
one exam short of completing your MCSD. Assuming you didn't use dumps to
pass all your other exams, wouldn't you rather feel good about your
accomplishments? And wouldn't you rather not lower the value of
certification in the eyes of employers by cheating your way into the
cert?

this is not conducive to the intended goals of this thread. fyi, i don't
cheat!

Well, I'm glad to hear that, Mark, but I fealt it needed to be said just the
same.

Thanks for providing us with some interesting conversation in here for a
change.

Bill "Frisbee" Hileman

P.S., For what it's worth, the people at Microsoft have talked to many of us
in the MCNGP on more than one occasion. They have asked us to "tone-down"
our attacks on "newbies" but only in the sense that they mean to not
immediately assume that they are pursuing cheating material. We've taken
that to heart, I think, but sometimes old habits slip through. On the other
hand, they've commended us on our mission, and at least unofficially approve
what we say and do to those who are blatantly attempting to cheat, or to
help others cheat.


.

Quantcast