[Global_conference_committee] [Global_chapter_committee] [Global_membership_committee] Conference/Chapter Revenue Splitting
L. Gustavo C. Barbato
lgbarbato at owasp.org
Sat Dec 18 10:04:10 EST 2010
Sorry, English mistake:
$ sed -e 's/embassy/underlie/g' < previous_email
L. *Gustavo* C. *Barbato*, Ph.D.
Chapter Leader, OWASP Porto Alegre / *Brazil*
Global Chapter Committee Member
On 12/18/2010 12:18 PM, L. Gustavo C. Barbato wrote:
> One thing is having only one chapter per country, which can host an
> AppSec yearly (yearly earnings), another is many of them which means
> many different administrations. My previous comments were just related
> to have a fair distribution because when we talk about fairness, we
> must not only look at our own situation (which sometimes may be
> comfortable) but think and decide collectively as a real team with the
> same strongest goal in mind which is support OWASP organization (HQ).
> In this case, a possible question can come to somebody's mind which
> I'd like to try to answer pro-actively: So why not having only one
> chapter per country then and get everybody together under a
> centralized administration? Well, first of all, some countries are big
> enough for such division; decentralization gives more motivation to
> leaders because they can take decisions by "their own"; they can be
> more creative; more contributions in a long term - membership and
> projects; different ways of treating some subjects because even
> though we are talking about the same country, different
> regions/states/cities has different culture. All in all, I have many
> others reasons but as this is not the main point of this thread I'll
> stop here not to mix subjects-- if somebody is against of such
> distribution, please feel free to contact me or Chapters Committee
> Regarding asking for $, frankly, I prefer proving mechanisms to
> chapters earn by themselves instead of just asking whenever necessary
> (in the case of this thread, one of the mechanism is hosting
> conferences - I know others BTW). Well, in order to embassy my saying
> aforementioned I'd like to use a /proverb/:
> "//Give/ a man a /fish/; you have fed him for today. /Teach/ a man to
> /fish///; and you have fed him for a lifetim/e". Please don't
> misunderstand, I'm not saying that to host a conference doesn't
> involve Conference Committee support including $ sometimes - of course
> it does - my point is just related to chapters "being paid" for their
> work on conferences. Mechanism: do all necessary work to host a
> conference; Compensation: a good part of the Conferences earnings.
> Just it! In this manner, everybody feels happy!
> L. *Gustavo* C. *Barbato*, Ph.D.
> Chapter Leader, OWASP Porto Alegre / *Brazil*
> Global Chapter Committee Member
> On 12/17/2010 10:21 AM, John Wilander wrote:
>> Gosh, some heavy emailing going on here.
>> Just a short one to answer Mark's request for examples of chapters
>> being denies funding.
>> I think this is not a case of chapters asking for money and being
>> denied. No such examples to my knowledge. I think the case is "we
>> have no money so we don't do X and Y". Chapters don't feel empowered
>> or comfortable to write an email to Mark or Kate and ask for $.
>> Instead they strive in mediocracy and skip doing better events.
>> In concrete terms ... Samy Kamkar's talks at several European
>> chapters were a huge success. But they were _not_ initiated by
>> empowered chapters. It was a /central/ OWASP initiative with a
>> /central/ funding solution in place. Now OWASP Sweden wants to pursue
>> this path and invite Mario Heiderich, Gareth Heyes, Dinis Cruz etc.
>> Great! But have we written an email to Mark yet? No. Not even I,
>> being a member of the GCC, feel comfortable asking for the
>> foundation's money to run a local event.
>> In this case OWASP Sweden actually has money. Why? Because we got a
>> share of the revenue from OWASP AppSec in Stockholm. So we're going
>> to fly Mario Heiderich in and build upon the success with Samy. We
>> already have more than 500 members and we asked them what we should
>> use the chapter's money for. Answer: More international experts
>> giving talks and tutorials. This is what the chapter members want.
>> (Of course we will try to find sponsors to lower the chapter's costs
>> and we will try to cooperate with OWASP Finland and Norway so we can
>> share travel costs.)
>> Regards, John
>> 2010/12/16 L. Gustavo C. Barbato <lgbarbato at owasp.org
>> <mailto:lgbarbato at owasp.org>>
>> I also defend the idea of collaboration between chapters in order
>> to achieve great conferences results - when I say collaboration I
>> do mean collaborate
>> <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/collaborate> (/to work,
>> one with another; cooperate, as on a literary work/), in other
>> words, without having profits in mind.
>> However, aiming to compensate the collaboration on conferences
>> and have a fair support of OWASP, I do defend the idea of having
>> conferences in different cities yearly according to local
>> chapters locations. Nevertheless, we can't forget the hard work
>> necessary of local chapters to host a conference -- I know that
>> because after the AppSec Brazil 2010 (last month), I don't stop
>> thinking and working on AppSec 2011 -- it's already being
>> L. *Gustavo* C. *Barbato*, Ph.D.
>> Chapter Leader, OWASP Porto Alegre / *Brazil*
>> Global Chapter Committee Member
>> On 12/15/2010 12:29 PM, Mark Bristow wrote:
>>> Comments forwarded on Lucas's behalf (he's on vacation and can't
>>> send as the right user.....)
>>> I don't like the idea of having one chapter getting so more
>>> funds then
>>> others. For AppSec Brasil, we will have people from multiple
>>> involved and it would not be nice to have one chapter getting
>>> all the
>>> money. Having to decide a split amongst chapters would need energy
>>> that could be better used somewhere else.
>>> In principle, I don't like the idea of having chapters
>>> "fighting" for
>>> money, and we may have this in the future if the chapter split
>>> is too
>>> high. I'm afraid collaboration may decrease in the long run. On the
>>> oher hand, I'd like to see a solution that increases the involvement
>>> of chapter leader in our conferences, specially to have people from
>>> different chpaters to collaborate in conference teams.
>>> I think that having many chapters with some money is better than
>>> having a few chapters with a lot of money. I think we should invest
>>> more in getting more active chapters than making a few chapters more
>>> The fund idea seams a good solution to me.
>>> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Neil Matatall <neil at owasp.org
>>> <mailto:neil at owasp.org>> wrote:
>>> Well this thread has become epic and unfortunately I haven't
>>> been able
>>> to catch all of the ideas. I really hope I can catch up,
>>> but why
>>> don't we have a conference call or discuss this at the
>>> summit (those
>>> not in attendance will have to be accommodated somehow)?
>>> Times like these make me wish my phone has an "threaded"
>>> email view :(
>>> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Jason Li <jason.li
>>> <http://jason.li>@owasp.org <http://owasp.org>> wrote:
>>> > So taking Michael's suggestion of starting fresh, I've
>>> cleared the long
>>> > quote of the thread.
>>> > As an observer to the thread, I'm going to capture what I
>>> think has been
>>> > mentioned so far on the thread.
>>> > And then I'll weigh in with my humble opinion, keeping in
>>> mind that I am not
>>> > involved in the Conferences Committee, Membership
>>> Committee, Chapter
>>> > Committee, or the Board (in other words, I'm a nobody in
>>> this conversation
>>> > :)).
>>> > ----
>>> > Summary of Problem:
>>> > Where does Conference revenue go?
>>> > Points of Concern:
>>> > 1) Conferences are put on with the assistance of local
>>> chapters and
>>> > coordination/support from the OWASP mothership
>>> > 2) We want a way to reward local chapters for their help with
>>> > running/coordinating a conference
>>> > 3) We want conference attendees the option to get OWASP
>>> Memberships bundled
>>> > in with the conference
>>> > 4) Chapters need money to do things
>>> > -------
>>> > Now with that out of the way, my personal thoughts:
>>> > #4 is completely independent of Conference revenue. There
>>> are lots of other
>>> > OWASP sectors that also need money to do things (Projects
>>> and Summits for
>>> > example). If there is a need for Chapters to do something,
>>> then this should
>>> > be allocated out of the main OWASP mothership budget and
>>> not out of
>>> > Conference revenue.
>>> > In my view, conference revenue should go to one of three
>>> > 1) OWASP Mothership fund (where the Board can then
>>> re-allocate as needed to
>>> > support Chapters or other initiatives as appropriate)
>>> > 2) Local Chapter(s) supporting the conference (in order to
>>> recognize their
>>> > support)
>>> > 3) Conferences fund managed by the Conferences Committee
>>> > I'm not even sure if #3 is really necessary as that could
>>> also fall under
>>> > #1.
>>> > The only real debate is what proportion of the revenue
>>> should go into which
>>> > bucket. That's where I believe this debate originally
>>> started. All this
>>> > other talk about chapter needs and a chapter fund has
>>> clouded the
>>> > discussion.
>>> > -Jason
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Global_conference_committee mailing list
>>> > Global_conference_committee at lists.owasp.org
>>> <mailto:Global_conference_committee at lists.owasp.org>
>>> Mark Bristow
>>> (703) 596-5175
>>> mark.bristow at owasp.org <mailto:mark.bristow at owasp.org>
>>> OWASP Global Conferences Committee Chair - http://is.gd/5MTvF
>>> OWASP DC Chapter Co-Chair - http://is.gd/5MTwu
>>> AppSec DC Organizer - https://www.appsecdc.org
>>> Global_chapter_committee mailing list
>>> Global_chapter_committee at lists.owasp.org <mailto:Global_chapter_committee at lists.owasp.org>
>> Global_conference_committee mailing list
>> Global_conference_committee at lists.owasp.org
>> <mailto:Global_conference_committee at lists.owasp.org>
>> John Wilander, https://twitter.com/johnwilander
>> Chapter co-leader OWASP Sweden, http://owaspsweden.blogspot.com
>> Co-organizer Global Summit, http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Summit_2011
>> Conf Comm, http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Global_Conferences_Committee
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Global_conference_committee