[eropple]

Like it or not, vernacular changes. Today, in most contexts, "sysadmin" suggests (at worst) a Windows pusher armed with a mouse and (at best) a heads-down computer toucher (which is also what this "devops consultant" document seems to outline, really, so you're not wrong!).

You're totally right in that sysadmins can certainly practice (part of) devops, but anywhere I've ever gone it's less the rule then the exception and "sysadmin" is a career-limiting classification, akin to calling oneself a programmer [0]. Ends, not means, etc.

[0] - https://www.kalzumeus.com/2011/10/28/dont-call-yourself-a-pr...

[somepig]

certainly won't disagree that it can be limiting to folks of some perspectives, but as someone who publicly has applied the sysadmin label for the duration of their career (starting in the early 00's), I've yet to see a downside.

I've been obscenely compensated for working on interesting projects for much of my career. then again, part of it may be due to the confidence that comes with focusing on my work instead of fluffing my title.

[eropple]

You also, candidly, may be experienced enough and have enough time-served to get away with it. ;) There's definitely an effect--I kinda want to call it a thermocline?--above which your actual achievements can speak for themselves, particularly if you've built a solid network.

Today, if I had a notion to, I could probably call myself a "sysadmin" and not have trouble finding well-compensated work. But when I was freelancing, as well as when I was earlier in my career, I can tell you a lot of doors would have slammed right shut had I used the term regardless of my capacity. I do not particularly love the term "devops", but at this point its umbrella at least encompasses what we (like, you and I, not the general we) think about when we're doing this stuff, and it has a certain amount of loaned--or stolen--credibility.

As I said in a top-level comment, I'm more twitchy at this description of being a consultant than I am at the devops part.