Straight shooting as always Draz, Respect.

The only way to change ACS is from within. As you’ve said, you may learn a few things as well. Never hurts to be on the inside. With that said,

Groucho Marx’s “I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member” seems even more true when mandatory….

Just call me The Flipper.

Yes Big Galoot it is true! Maybe finally this Blog has tapped into the reality that others facing this ACS has not looked at. It would be interesting to see how an independent audit would find this group.

I don’t know where you guys got the idea that ACS membership is mandatory – it’s complete crap. I wish you’d emailed me first to check, Drazen, before getting your mates worked into a lather.

The ACS does have a role in credential-vetting for the immigration dept, and a fee is payable for that, but that process has nothing to do with ACS membership. The credential-vetting is performed by independent examiners who are specialists in detecting ‘paper’ boat people, of which there are many. In fact they have had to attend training in Adelaide at the AFP’s centre of expertise in document forgery detection.

I’m only negative from comments like “it does show just how the ACS plays the game” when I’ve just told you that the ACS doesn’t play any game.

If you are an existing Professional Grade member of the ACS your credentials will have been vetted as part of your membership application processing. Some migration agents mistakenly assume that, because ACS professional grade members are automatically approved (because the standard required to achieve that membership grade exceeds the standard required for immigration credential certification) that is the best route to recommend to their clients. It is entirely misconceived. Anyone who enquires at the ACS is told that very clearly, as is anyone who follows the step by step procedures set out at http://www.acs.org.au/index.cfm?action=show&conID=skillassessment.

If you do your homework you will discover that everyone seeking to come to Australia under the skilled migration programme has to have their credentials vetted and that in each profession an organisation has been designated to perform that role.

So what the ACS is doing is entirely unremarkable and is the same as numerous other professional associations are doing every day in ensuring that people wanting to immigrate to Australia on the basis of asserted professional skills cannot simply do so on the basis of a self certification or, more usually, on the basis of forged or dubious credentials.

If any of you reading this thread believe you have the ability to vet credentials in your specialised niche you might even like to become examiners so that if someone applies to come here on the basis of a specialisation
in that niche, we have an expanded band of examiners to choose from in referring out the vetting task.

Interesting responses from people under the same misconception?

No – they assumed that what you’d said was accurate!

Hopefully you will allow your new team member to make up his own mind about whether to join the ACS – why not use it as a case study and report back on his experiences? That’s got to be more responsible than spreading rumours.

-(:-)=

Phillip,
you may have convinced yourself that this is a storm in a teacup, but you would be on your own.

You appear to be cleverly avoiding the real issue: Many people (as evidenced here) have been led to believe ACS membership will genuinely assist them in their visa application.

Why, one asks, would they or their migration agents form that view ? Are they all dummies ?

The answer is very simple: They have been cleverly mislead. A slight of hand by the ACS.

Contained within the S8.4 of the ACS immigration assessment document is the following text: “Membership of the ACS may enhance employment prospects.”

Combined with the knowledge that their assessment is being undertaken by ACS examiners (hardly “independent”, Phil), this then paints a very clear picture for prospective visa applicants.

If they want that visa, they should buy ACS membership, plain & simple. No, its not mandatory, but it *will* help, nudge nudge, wink wink, know what I mean ?

It’s rather interesting that people make this belief that it is mandatory in one way or another. In the context of a visa, it’s marketing to people who really want something and will do all recommended to get it. You can twist the wording anyway you like ACS but people will make the assumption that they should become a member to enhance the likelihood of approval and that is wrong.

Precisely,
taking your argument to it’s logical conclusion – if they’ve already lined up a job (in order to qualify), why is it then necessary to mention ACS membership as a means of enhancing employment prospects – if one already has a job ?

Surely, you would agree – this is a ludicrous proposition.

Of course, there is a more logical reason for mentioning ACS membership on an official document used for immigration to Australia.

Perhaps, just perhaps, it might assist one’s visa application.

Get of your heigh horse, Phil.

I’m not the knuckle head on the hobby horse!

-(:-)=

The ACS does not seek and never has sought mandatory membership.

@Phil

http://www.itwire.com/component/content/article/1-latest/203-acs-calls-for-mandatory-membership

I stand by my statement

@Anon
When I was vetted by ASC I believe it was $50-60 cheaper to become a member, which is exactly why I’ve always referred to it as “mandatory” membership.

@Philip
“You can’t apply to immigrate unless you already have a job lined up with a sponsor.”

Not true for those who apply through a Skilled – Recognised Graduate (subclass 476) process.

The ACS does not seek and never has sought mandatory membership of the ACS. We have advocated and continue to advocate that professionals should belong to and participate in a professional association of their choosing, subscribe to a code of ethics or practice, subject themselves to peer review in terms of being amendable to sacnction if their conduct is unprofessional, and should be covered by PI insurance.

If Stan Beer misreported what Edward Mandla said, or you have misread what Stan Beer reported, it does not knock me out of the ball park any more than it knocks the knucklehead off his hobby horse.

Thanks phill, I walked game over. We will continue to see the value of the ACS at differing ends of the stick, Isnt living in, working and having membership to a democratically elected representation with freedom of speach grand? well at least you know what to of them are like..

Argy Bargy,
you are indeed a true master of double-speak. Once again, its what you omit to say, that speaks volumes.

For example;

“The credential-vetting is performed by independent examiners”
What you omitted to say was – these examiners are either ACS members themselves, or are paid by the ACS. This is NOT “independent”. Go on, be a man and admit this.

“The ACS does not seek and never has sought mandatory membership of the ACS.”
What you omitted to say (until I brought to your attention) – the ACS advertises on an official immigration document. This representation could very well mislead people into thinking it will assist their application.

The question for you Phillip, is, if you accept that people may be mislead by the content of that document, what are you prepared to do about it ?

Argy: last seen dragging his bat & ball back to his mummies’ house, sobbing in tears.

Knucklehead: Fallen off horse – brain dead
Anon: Still in hiding
Hugh Jorgen: Size isn’t everything
Fightin’ Phil: Still shadow boxing
Philip Argy: LOL

In theory with legal speak, and being a law student, Phil and his wording are probably right but like all lawyers, is he kidding himself when pitted against reality? Phil goes to bed at night knowing his double speak is BS. Hopefully he’s having a laugh.

Is it because as @isidort on Twitter asked; are most ACS members not able to respond because they’re driving a cab? Membership get them far?

False Pretenders is an apt handle for someone who can’t get the truth right.

The forums here must not be frequented much. Thought I would add this here: http://beastorbuddha.com/forums/index.php?action=vthread&forum=1&topic=236

I am all for industry standards and bodies certifying professionals – we do this for doctors, accountants and so on.

However, its pretty unethical how the ACS is embedding itself within IT industry and federal government so that if you’re not a member or not giving them cash, then you’re not a “true” IT professional.

When I was at uni I was asked by my lecturers if I wanted to be a member. I said no thanks. My dad had worked in IT for 20+ years by this point. Same with a lot of his mates. Most of my friends were in IT for 3+. Not one of them was an ACS member so I really didn’t see the benefit in joining (and I would have if there was one). It just struck me that a lot of university students and lecturers where members – not people who actually worked in the field.

Here we are ten years on. I still don’t see a lot of value – but I do see more strongarm tactics to try and win members rather that adding value.

Its a shame really because everyone loses under that model.

“if you don’t belong to and participate in any professional association in our view you’re not a true professional”

Thats so funny, it really is.

Strikingly similar pious & self-righteous pontifications are rife in religion – as a means of ensuring their continuing existence. Perhaps thats why people are walking away in droves.

I’m still not convinced your *real* name isn’t Cardinal George Pell, “Phil” ?

Until now Phil, I was prolly the only guy here apart from Draz that wasn’t aggro at you. But now you’re pissing me off by feigning ignorance, so I’ll bite.

1) Strong arm tactics described here:
http://www.itwire.com/component/content/article/1-latest/203-acs-calls-for-mandatory-membership
This has been discussed previously here. But if you want to dredge up old shit, do you care to comment again?

2) Again in The Knuckles last post on the 3rd of Feb. You didn’t respond to any of his points. Again, care to answer the tough questions?

3) I asked around the parts and found at least two other ACS members who were immigrants who signed up because they thought it would a) help their chances and b) because it was cheaper. When I asked further both said they felt it was misrepresented.

If these aren’t strong arm tactics (misrepresentation and then attempted use of force) I don’t know what is.

Even if I assume you’re more ethical than your counterparts within the ACS, at best – the apple has clearly fallen far from the tree.

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!

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.

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?

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.

A sliver of integrity – there may be hope yet

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.

You’re right about having a little member

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.

I was told this was the place to come, but peace?

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?”

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 ,

You sound a bit angry. Did Drazen not hire you for a job at one point.

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 ?

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.”

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 !

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.

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”)

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

@ 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.

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.

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.

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 !!!

2004: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies-archive.cfm/241734.html

2010: BeastorBuddha

Nothing has changed.

Peter,

You are soo full of it. Redneck? hmmm

Miranda,

Makes for good reading and laughing heartedly

Gee I dislike Trolls.

I’d like to think that I have posted both professionally and with respect for all parties included thus far in this forum, whether they deserve it or not.

I too am still waiting for evidence of misleading marketing that exists TODAY, which implies ACS membership will/might help a visa application???

All official brochures, forms and guides to do with Immigration should be able to be found on http://www.immi.gov.au. There ones about occupations in demand, official bodies who can conduct skills assessments, etc, etc. Yet I have found nothting the evidences the “misleading marketing” allegation. I have also searched the ACS website. Nothing. Come on – put up or shut up.

Phil has made a commitment to fix any misleading marketing above:
http://beastorbuddha.com/2010/02/02/securus-global-about-to-get-an-acs-member-no-joke/#comment-7560

I’m sure this includes advertising that could be misconstrueded (sp?).

If there are migration agents providing incorrect information, then that is out of the ACS’ control.

If I personally were applying for a visa to work in another country as an ICT professional, I _personally_ would join their local/national professional body that represents ICT individuals, especially if I could get it for half price, which is the case here in Australia. Well, it works out to about half price after you take into account the discount for doing the skills assessment as a professional MACS.

Then, if I failed to see value in maintaining my membership of said professional body, I would do what all too many past ACS members (both domestic and international) have done and let my membership lapse. This is the real problem facing the ACS today and one which is starting to be addressed by people who are committed to doing something about it. But remember, nothing worthwhile in life comes easily…

This is to Mr Peter Griffith of Adelaide South Australia. (I thought I’d outline a brief history of your home state & reasons why you are a pompous gimp.)

1836: Site for Adelaide chosen by Colonel William Light beside the River Torrens. (Because of it’s geographical location, the River Murray’s draining out the arse-end of Aus, its pious attitudes & bizarre goings on, Adelaide will later become colloquially known by the rest of Australia as “Adelaide: the arsehole of Australia.”)

1837: Colonel Light completes survey of Adelaide city centre and designs the city’s grid layout. (The fact that the city was designed and surveyed by a free man, as opposed to convicts, lends cause to many South Australians to falsely believe they are somehow better than all other of Australians. They are wrong, but this is where the snobbery of Peter Griffith etc has it’s origins.)

1862: John McDouall Stuart successfully crosses the continent from north to south on his sixth attempt. Despite nearly killing himself in the process, it was not a bad effort, even for a South Australian.

1872: The General Post Office opened. Adelaide became first Australian capital linked to Imperial London with completion of the Overland Telegraph from Adelaide to Darwin. (This pleases South Australians greatly, as they had a direct phone link to the “motherland”. South Australians continue to speak with a pompous, pommy accent. To this very day, they continue to believe they are more a part of England than Australia.)

1881: Coopers Brewery is established. (Coopers & Grange continue to be the only decent things ever to be produced by SA.)

1901: Adelaide became a state capital upon the establishment of the Commonwealth of Australia on 1 January. The Duke and Duchess of York visit. People of Adelaide in raptures over a visit from their royalty. They bung on their strange pommy accent for the visit. By this time, the remainder of Australia had developed it’s unique Aussie twang.

1927: Duke and Duchess of York visit yet again, to reaffirm their love of the people of South Australia, who have retained & nurtured the finest British traditions of snobbery.

1954: Queen Elizabeth II makes first sovereign visit to Adelaide. Ditto remarks of 1927 & 1901, in other words, groundhog day for the snobs of SA.

1955: Town of Elizabeth officially proclaimed, as a suckhole gesture to British Royalty.

1958: Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, visits Adelaide to thank them for naming a town after her progeny. Ditto remarks of 1954, 1927 & 1901.

1963: Queen Elizabeth II visits Adelaide. (Are we beginning to see a pattern here ?)

1967: Don Dunstan, wearing the very finest of pink jumpsuits, becomes SA’s premier. Aside from being snobs, they are also weirdos, as we shall see later.

1975: The International Equestrian Exposition is held in Adelaide and attended by Princess Anne. Punters debated which looked more like a horse, Princess Anne or her horse.

1978: The remains of seven women are found in bushland near Truro. SA’s pattern of weirdo behavior is beginning to emerge.

1981: Prince Charles visits Adelaide. He is interviewed as a suspect for the Truro murders, but despite regularly visiting SA (British royalty’s other homeland), he claims he was not in SA at that particular time.

1986: Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip visit Adelaide. They are very pleased but surprised to observe that the elitist pommy accent is still being used by South Australians.

1999: Eight bodies are found in a disused bank volt in barrells in Snowtown, further bodies were later found. Weirdos !

2010: Peter Griffith of the Adelaide branch of the ACS emerges. Makes some unfounded but predictably pious remarks, reflecting his background as a stuck-up person from Adelaide.

2010: The Knuckle considers joining the Facebook Special interest group known as “Adelaide…The asshole of Australia” http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&viewas=0&gid=31718577494

South Australia = Proof Tasmanians can swim

Argy,

Bloody hell are you coming round a little? has your guard dropped? or has the wheels fallen of the ACS high horse? An olive branch or a poisoned challis? I’m all for a broader discussion on the values of the ACS v anything else. i.e. (AISA, ISACA, ISC2, CISSP) etc however;

I will not and cannot join a group that does not have democratically elected boards and or management at both the state and federal levels, you have had a series of Pious Presidents who by your own rules can be autocratic and run off at the mouth when and where they like.
Seriously your management smacks of cronyism in an effort to push your own agendas supported by appointing people who share your/that agenda. I have seen yours and others plea “if you don’t like it join and help us change” 400 against 4000 (numbers can be debated) I keep harping on about your approach, Nationalistic and Supremacist in your outlook and how it is portrayed in this forum (Peter Griffith does you no favours and much collateral damage), until you change FORGET IT.

Your = ACS, not you directly Phil, you wouldn’t be like that

Please let this thread die already. It’s game set and match. Drazen is the best ever. ACS Suck, Draz, Mate, you should be their new president!

Best,

Wade

Curious at the source of the suggestion that ACS has no democratically elected boards. I suggest whoever thinks that read the ACS Rules and National Regulations and identify which of the various election processes prescribed there are not democratic processes. Here’s the link to help anyone who might inadvertently forget to do their homework before shooting their mouth off:
http://www.acs.org.au/index.cfm?action=show&conID=acsrules

No worries Phillip.
Of interest, Drazen rang me this morning when I was on my to our SA ACS IT Security Special Interest Group.
It’s a Joint SIG between ACS and ISACA.
This month the program was arranged by the Director for IT Security in the State Government Office of the CIO.
The event was sponsored by Ernst and Young who flew their partner responsible for Forensics over from Melbourne. He gave an excellent presentation on new IT development effect on Forensics and collection of evidence.

EY also flew a speaker from Canberra based Cert Australia (formerly AusCert) who told us of the new roles of Cert Australia, including their role in Cyber Security for both Government and Defence.

The IT Security SIG was formed as a further development relating to the IT Security Accreditation Program developed by ACS Education and ISACA for Government IT staff working in IT Security.

Wish you luck in getting a similar SIG going in NSW.

Cheers

PG

General members elect their Branch Executive Committee. Each Branch Executive Committee elects two of its members to be National Congressional Representatives. Congress, sitting as an electroal college, elects the Management Committee (National Board) and National Office Bearers. No-one is permitted to serve for more than two terms. The President may not serve for more than one consecutive term and cannot stand for re-election until there have been two successors.

Thanks FB. Can we close this discussion off now?

Am sure the discussion will move elsewhere as it always does.

As much as it seems no one gives ground, I’d like to think there are positives from both sides to come from this, from people airing their thoughts and grievances. Lets see how things pan out.

DD