[Global_conference_committee] [Global_membership_committee] Honorary Memberships - Vote Scheduled for 12/21 @ Membership Meeting

Michael Coates michael.coates at owasp.org
Sun Dec 12 16:50:36 EST 2010


On Dec 12, 2010, at 1:35 PM, Mark Bristow wrote:

> <inject>
> 
> I actually was talking to Jason Li and Dinis about this at AppSec BR.  We were thinking that we could develop a "OWASP Points" System that assigns points to people based on the OWASP Activities they do.  Ultimately We'd might work out member "levels" or some benefits to add to this, but i digress.  
> 
> You all would set "global" point values for things like, being a committee member, committee chair, board member, and other general member stuff.  The thought would be each committee would assign the point values for their respective AORs but it would be a Membership Committee initiative (see how I volunteered you?).  Committee Chairs would have to report in points say, quarterly and they would be assigned on completion of the activity.
> 
> As an Example for the GCC we do something like (point values are nominal, we'd have to get together and normalize them):
> OWASP Conference (Core) Organizer: 50 Pts
> OWASP Conference Planning Committee Members: 20 Pts
> OWASP Conference Voluenteer: 10 Pts
> Attend an OWASP Conference: 5pts
> Attend OWASP Training Class: 5pts
> Host an OWASP Event: 10 Pts
> Projects would then do something similar for their stuff (take a project to alpha release, lead a project, submit code .... whatever they want)
> 
> Industry, Connections, Education, Chapters and so on.
> 
> This serves 2 functions.  You would be able to show off how many OWASP points you'e earned..... and for employers, employees, having substantial OWASP points could be a reason to get a raise, job et all.
> 
> OFC, you'd have to be a individual member of the organization for any of this to be tracked.
> 
> </inject>

I think this is an interesting idea.  

My concerns are the following:
- The process of determining point values will place inherent value on some types of OWASP support of others.  I would be concerned we would make people feel their contributions aren't valuable unless they are doing item X (in your example - organizing a conference).
- This will take a fair amount of work to accurately report and keep track of the points.
- I'm not sure if this will necessarily inspire people to contribute more to OWASP? Currently we have a very natural system where people that do good work are recognized.  I think conference organizers are well known for their efforts, as are people taking active roles in committees, OWASP projects, and just making the everyday operations of OWASP keep churning smoothly.

I certainly like the creativity of where this is going, but I'd be concerned about implementing such a process unless we can work out the potential roadblocks and also demonstrate that this will have a net positive for the amount of time we invest.


-Michael


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/global_conference_committee/attachments/20101212/06cd433f/attachment.html 


More information about the Global_conference_committee mailing list