Slashdot Mirror


British Computer Society Is Officially At Civil War

An anonymous reader writes "A vote of no confidence against the current board of directors has erupted in what is possibly the first nerd war, raging throughout the British Computer Society. More financial- and spreadsheet-related fixations and less computer science have made a few members cross; plus they don't like the new name 'The Chartered Institute of IT.' Here are more specific details on the extraordinary emergency general meeting on July 1, where members will vote to decide the fate of the board of directors."

25 of 275 comments (clear)

  1. Civil war? by gzipped_tar · · Score: 5, Funny

    At first I thought it was about British Computer Society declaring war against the UK government.

    Meh. nothingtoseeheremovealong

    --
    Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
    1. Re:Civil war? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is not just a couple of nerds throwing a fit. It is an important professional organization and whose interest it should server. More information: here. The question is whether or not the organization should represent practicing IT professionals or management.

    2. Re:Civil war? by jimicus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Seconded.

      I was a member for a while, I cancelled the membership when I figured I was paying £80/year for the privilege of putting MBCS after my name and... er... that was about it.

      The only way I can see it being important is if the computing industry ever reaches the point where there's a real benefit in being able to call yourself a "Chartered IT Professional" or somesuch (much as you can be a Chartered Engineer, Chartered Accountant or Chartered Surveyor and if you are, you're legally allowed to do some things you wouldn't otherwise be able to).

    3. Re:Civil war? by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It will never happen. Corporations DESPERATELY do not want IT to rise back to a "skilled" level where they have to pay premium wages for it again. They want IT to be the next Factory job where you get low wages and bad hours...

      Requirements = higher pay rates. And companies dont want that. They want IT people they can hire for $10-$13 an hour USD and keep them cheap. They dont want to hire a guy that is highly skilled and educated for $23.00 an hour and higher... Because he is hard to replace, while the MCSE kid that will take a paltry $11.00 an hour and think he hit he jackpot is very easy to replace.

      This is why you dont see companies demanding certifications and education levels... Because they will be forced to double pay rates. and they do not want to do that.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:Civil war? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That must be the reason every mainland country in Europe associates "Brittish soccer fans" with the worst kind of hooligans?

      Sure, and the French go around with stripey T-shirts and wearing necklaces made of onion, while the Germans live on a diet of beer and 15 different kinds of sausage.

      Or maybe decades-old stereotypes that apply to a tiny fraction of the population aren't very helpful.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    5. Re:Civil war? by MadKeithV · · Score: 3, Funny

      Perhaps the server served a severe swerve with verve.

    6. Re:Civil war? by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Aussie, degree qualified developer, 20yrs experience - $US23.00 an hour is nowhere near enough to get me out of bed.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    7. Re:Civil war? by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed. But corporations dont want you. They want dirt cheap mediocre labor.

      It's why instead of hiring a seasoned developer they outsource it for 1/5th your cost to another place and then live with the sub-par result.

      They might not want to but they end up having to concede and hire a seasoned developer to clean up the mess... or be stuck with a poorly written system with operational costs running high up (eating up any savings they were expected from off-shoring.)

      Doesn't matter what they want, when the rubber hits the road, they have no choice but to hire/re-hire skilled developers back. I've seen this happening in 15 years work. I've not seen any evidence to the contrary. It doesn't mean that right now there is no job shortage, but that's a function of the economy as a whole, and not of off-shoring.

      In the last 10 years I've worked with 5 different companies were off-shoring played a big rule. There was a lot of job shuffling, but not the catastrophic layoffs people attribute to off-shoring. And every off-shored project going south is simply another opportunity to step up to the plate and clean it up (hopefully as a consultant with paid O/T.). If you are dumb and can't take advantage of it, then yeah, you are at risk of getting the pink slip, but that's on you, not off-shoring or IT as a whole.

      The idea that companies can just get rid of skilled labor in favor off-shoring and getting away with it (and that such a thing becomes the status quo of the IT industry) is a fallacy.

      Companies think they can save a buck by firing their skilled staff in favor of off-shoring for a 1/5th of a price? Let them. Let them do it and burn as they almost inevitably do. In the meantime, you re-invent yourself in some other slice of the IT sector, cleaning up the mess left by a previous badly managed off-shore effort (and make a good, steady and technically-rewarding living out of it.)

  2. Re:I was asked to join this .. by beelsebob · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Basically, you can attain levels of experience that you can then use to demonstrate to potential new employers that you have experience, and skills used in industry. Unfortunately, it's all very management biased, and anti actually doing any computing biased. For example, IIRC, the various programming skills start at level 1 qualifications max out at level 6, while management skills start at level 5 and max out at level 10.

  3. Brilliant! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I had to meet with a bunch of BCS reps when my course was re-accredited, and the experience matches up with what the summary says. They were obsessing over whether the mathematics of CS were too difficult and all kinds of bogus concerns

    I think their problem is that higher level courses are (inherently) not an "everyone's invited" thing. Because not everyone will succeed. And that's how it should be. They're difficult if they're done right, because they include a lot hard-line theory behind the soft 'Let's do Java' exterior. The BCS just can't seem to accept this though. They want to pervert the courses to make them easier, basically

    More people on courses = more power to them? Or maybe they get extra money for getting a certain % of the population onto courses? I have no idea of their motives but whatever they are, they're going about them the wrong way

    1. Re:Brilliant! by CrashandDie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I did a quick course after the equivalent of high school. Mostly because I was bored, and my buddies were going that route.

      I'm one of those guys who's not particularly bad at math, but just sucks at the way it's being taught in school. Anyway, this is a course mostly directed towards students who completed electronics and electrotechnics degrees. Those degrees are aimed at people who have a "scientific" mind, but didn't score well enough in math and science in the previous years. Something for everyone, right?

      The first day of that degree, our math teacher informed us that most of us were going to fail math. Not because we were bad or stupid, not because we'd be smoking drugs and getting wasted every weekend, but quite simply because the stuff he'd be required by law to teach us was way out of our league, and that he expected almost half the class to be dumped by the end of the first semester.

      What he aimed for, was not for most of us to ace, he would be trying to get us to not fail too badly. Out of 24 students who started the course, 10 dropped out by the end of the first year, partly because they didn't like CS, but mostly because they were completely drowned in math and physics. Out of 10 students who got to the final exams in the end, 2 or 3 passed Math.

      The problem is that (in France), what the teacher has to teach the students is decided by some fat guys in suits who haven't seen nor remember what a student looks like for the past 20-30 years. They are stuck, getting insane requests from the industry, about 10 years too late, and trying to work out what might help. By the time the new stuff reaches the teachers and students, 15 or 20 years have passed. What you end up with are continuously deprecated degrees, where students come out, filled with hope and joy based on the lies their schools and teachers told them for the past few years, and are hit in the face during their first job interviews (if they ever get one) where they realise that nothing they've learned will be useful.

      Now, I got my degree, and most of friends did as well (only 1 didn't get it, as I recall, so 10%), but seriously, what's the point of giving uber-hard math, where kids just drop off and don't give a shit anymore, and doesn't stop them from getting their diploma in the end anyway? I went to maybe 3 math classes in my last year, and still got my diploma with flying colours. It's not about making it easier, it's about making it useful.

    2. Re:Brilliant! by Spad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's the misunderstanding de jour, at least in the UK, that the ideal situation is for everyone to be getting top marks in every exam they take - mostly due to bloody school league tables and the "everyone must go to uni" mentality. This does of course defeat the entire point of exams, which is to differentiate people based on their level of ability in a given field, to the extent that some universities are finding that *every* applicant for certain courses have 5 A's at A-Level and so deciding who to take is often a crap shoot. The (previous) government's brilliant solution to this issue? Add an A* grade at A-Level and carry on as normal.

    3. Re:Brilliant! by jayegirl · · Score: 4, Informative

      what's the point of giving uber-hard math, where kids just drop off and don't give a shit anymore, and doesn't stop them from getting their diploma in the end anyway? I went to maybe 3 math classes in my last year, and still got my diploma with flying colours. It's not about making it easier, it's about making it useful.

      Perhaps some of the point is, for once in the cess-pool that is the modern, utility and mediocrity obsessed tertiary education system, to attempt to provide broad-ranging bases of abstract knowledge to the students who actually want to learn, and are capable of doing so. That way we'll at least get some people who can work at the coal face of knowledge creation as opposed to just another batch of clueless, money-grabbing code monkeys?

      The sort of useful you're talking about is concerned with places where all the interesting, hard problems have already been solved. Sounds dull as dishwater if you've got a brain in your head.

  4. Re:I was asked to join this .. by malkavian · · Score: 3, Informative

    Under the "old way", the benefits were lots of lectures that you got to go to on various subjects, plus the chance to network with other professionals. Useful stuff really; some of those lectures were great.

    Under the 'new way', they've altered the way the "chartered" membership works; as it was in the old days, you could become a chartered IT professional without having to prove anything other than you'd stayed in the IT sector for 5 years. Now there are a series of exams to pass and frequent re-evaluation to maintain it (more in line with chartered engineer status from the engineering professions).

    Really, I think a lot of the new changes are to make the BCS more relevant to what commerce wants to know, rather than being a comp sci enclave. The thrust has changed direction, though this isn't necessarily a bad thing.

  5. Nothing beats a good CV (resume) by niks42 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Having membership of the BCS gives you nothing when it comes to getting a job. A CV glowing with past achievements; actually doing things, delivering things and demonstrating that you have the cuts and weals from real-world engagements is worth much more than being a fellow of a society. I'd have to explain to potential employers who the BCS are and what they do.

  6. Slow.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think the no confidence voters have been a bit slow to get their message out, the BCS has already sent out shiny information packs explaining why you should vote for them (I abstained due to this information shortage). I voted no about scrapping the rule of 50 members for a vote of no confidence though, seems like a nice democratic safeguard to me.

    Definitely the BCS has been dumbed down successively over the past 16 years I have been a full member, I suspect that this is because they basically want more members so lower the entry bar, in order to get the membership funds in their coffers. I definitely did not like the CITP membership level, it is the British COMPUTER socienty, that should cover anything in the field of computing and not just information technology.

    Anyway, I think a rocket up the ass like this is good for any organisation so we will see what comes out of it.

  7. Re:I was asked to join this .. by Arancaytar · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... so you have to double-class to manager to join?

    (All this stuff about skill levels sounds funny. :P )

  8. Oh come on by antifoidulus · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's not a real nerd war until someone gets hit in the head with a plastic light saber!

  9. The BCS is an irrelevance by Viol8 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Its a society run by and for people who cut their teeth on 1950s and 60s mainframes. Nothing wrong with that, but people seem to assume it has any relevance or authority today. It doesn't. No one I know in IT belongs to it or is even the slightest bit interested in it. Its the computing equivalent of a historic car club with similar types of people as members.

    1. Re:The BCS is an irrelevance by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Funny

      I've always viewed it as a cabal of ancient gummy git-wizards, with a three foot beard and lifetime membership of the Campaign for Real Ale being pre-requisites for membership.

      As far as I can see it, the current Grand High Git-Wizard rescued the BCS from total irrelevance, and is actually in danger of making it an organisation with a purpose. This angers the other git-wizards, who want to get back to the real business of the BCS: finally concluding the debate over whether the PDP-11 was a retrograde step from the PDP-8.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  10. They're an elitist waste of space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When they introduced the Chartered status they automatically upgraded every member. Then the set the boundaries at a certain number of years experience, plus qualifications. Then they changed it to a framework whereby you had to have managed a certain number of people, and had a certain size budget. Then they changed it so that you had to have complete strategic accountability in a significant organisation. They're completely alienating a significant proportion of their members, who are technical professionals, not guys in boardrooms.

  11. Typical bureaucratic garbage by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Here's how it goes: Somebody has a great idea to form an association of some sort. Then, the idea of the actual association gets lost. Why? Narcissistic empathy-lacking morons are attracted to it because they can control the apparatus instead of deliver actual services. Then, the people who started the service get angry and fight back, and we get the situation we have here. Usually, the good guys lose and are forced to start their own splinter group. The new group never gets as big as the original because the original group has all the clout and relationships.

    I know a local "chamber of commerce" type organization. They spend all their time in committee meetings, electing general secretaries, and deciding who gets what title than actually promoting local business. Their association is a joke - it's obvious to everyone but them. To themselves, they're king ding-a-ling and they strut around like they're important people.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  12. Re:"First nerd war"? by forkazoo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is there ever a time when nerds aren't at war?

    There will be. Just as soon as the damned EMACS is burned off the face of this world, we can finally have peace. Until then, the corpses will just keep getting stacked up.

  13. Re:Bad choice of words by SimonInOz · · Score: 4, Funny

    >> Officially at war would mean a deceleration of war.

    Slowing down of war - I like the sound of that.

    --
    "Cats like plain crisps"
  14. Re:I was asked to join this .. by GIL_Dude · · Score: 3, Informative

    I agree with that, but I would point out that they probably try to represent this to folks outside their organization as being one scale instead of separate programmer and manager scale. Which would tend to show a manager at level 7 as more experienced than a programmer at level 6.