Inclusionary Language on Eligibility

[DMEdwards]

I am hoping someone can recommend to me the right communication path to request that the language on the "(ISC)² Candidate Background Qualifications" web page be modified to be more inviting to people who have lived under a different name for entirely legitimate reasons, such as being transgender or fleeing domestic abuse situations. I have heard from a couple of people that they have not pursued (ISC)² certifications because the current eligibility statement makes it sound like they are unwelcome.

Thanks,

-- Don

[DMEdwards]

Not sure why I was labeled as a "Newcomer" - I have been a proud member of (ISC)² for 9 years.

[AlecTrevelyan]

---

@DMEdwards wrote:

Not sure why I was labeled as a "Newcomer" - I have been a proud member of (ISC)² for 9 years.

---

"Newcomer" is supposed to be better than "Reader" which would have been your previous Community rank:

https://community.isc2.org/t5/Welcome/ISC-Community-Rankings-and-Badges/m-p/5381#M316

[DMEdwards]

Oh, that makes sense. Thank you, Alec!

-- Don

[rslade]

> DMEdwards (Newcomer I) posted a new reply in Member Support on 04-03-2021 07:54

> Not sure why I was labeled as a "Newcomer" - I have been a proud member of
> (ISC)² for 9 years.

It's an automatic tag based on the number of posts that you've made. See:
https://community.isc2.org/t5/W/I/m-p/5381
I was really annoyed when I was tagged as a "Defender" because pretty much
everyone knows that there are many recent actions by ISC2 that I do not defend
*at all* 🙂

====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@gmail.com rmslade@outlook.com rslade@computercrime.org
Cut out all these exclamation points. An exclamation point is
like laughing at your own joke. - F. Scott Fitzgerald
victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm http://twitter.com/rslade
http://blogs.securiteam.com/index.php/archives/author/p1/
https://community.isc2.org/t5/forums/recentpostspage/user-id/1324864413

[AndreaMoore]

@DMEdwards 

Thank you for sharing this. We have reached out to the appropriate team to review for clarity, inclusivity and appropriateness for certification candidates.

---

@DMEdwards wrote:

I am hoping someone can recommend to me the right communication path to request that the language on the "(ISC)² Candidate Background Qualifications" web page be modified to be more inviting to people who have lived under a different name for entirely legitimate reasons, such as being transgender or fleeing domestic abuse situations. I have heard from a couple of people that they have not pursued (ISC)² certifications because the current eligibility statement makes it sound like they are unwelcome.

Thanks,

-- Don

---

[DMEdwards]

Huge thanks to everyone involved in reviewing the eligibility language! I see that the criteria about pseudonyms has been removed entirely, which is wonderful.

[AndreaMoore]

Thank you to everyone who brought this to our attention. We posted a blog discussing these changes:

https://blog.isc2.org/isc2_blog/2021/11/we-heard-you-updates-to-the-isc2-ethics-questions.html