[Owasp-board] [Owasp-leaders] IBM and Microsoft

Jeff Williams jeff.williams at owasp.org
Sun Oct 26 04:00:13 UTC 2008


Tim,

Perhaps propaganda was too strong a word - I was trying to convey the idea
that marketing materials of any kind are simply unwelcome on the Leaders
list.  The leaders list is for OWASP business only. We don't allow anyone to
promote their projects there regardless of their motives.

This has nothing to do with arrogance or superiority.  It's just a practical
rule for keeping focus when hundreds of people are involved. I don't
appreciate you slandering OWASP or the board. I don't care if you want to
argue  with Christian or anyone else.  Just keep it out of OWASP.

--Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: tim.silkroad at gmail.com [mailto:tim.silkroad at gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Tim Bass
Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2008 10:14 PM
To: jeff.williams at owasp.org
Cc: tomb at owasp.org
Subject: Re: [Owasp-leaders] IBM and Microsoft

Jeff,

That is ridulous, calling a blog post from a sister security
organization "propaganda".   You have the same "anti other
organizational" bias don't you??   There is zero inappropriate about
my FYI post.  What is in appapropriate is the seemingly lack of adult
supervision in OWASP, where gang rules apply and ethics and
professionalism are subverted.   Really.

On 10/26/08, Jeff Williams <jeff.williams at owasp.org> wrote:
> Tim,
>
> Just to be clear, it is just as inappropriate to post ISC^2 propaganda on
> the Leaders list as it is to attack it.  Now quit it all of you or the
> Leaders list becomes moderated.
>
> --Jeff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owasp-leaders-bounces at lists.owasp.org
> [mailto:owasp-leaders-bounces at lists.owasp.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bass
> Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2008 2:09 AM
> To: Stephen Craig Evans
> Cc: OWASP Leaders
> Subject: Re: [Owasp-leaders] IBM and Microsoft
>
> Hi Stephen.
>
> I am not an (ISC)2 spokesperson, I am simply a member of (ISC)2 like
> many others in OWASP
> and I am someone who knows that bashing other security-related
> organization is unproductive.
>
> Why are folks so passionately hateful and mean toward anyone who does
> not bash (ISC)2?
>
> Why do you indirectly attack me for posting a blog post from (ISC)2 as an
> FYI?
>
> Just because I advocate, as Jeff and others do, not being divisive,
> that does not give you
> and other grounds to post snide remarks and misrepresent others.
>
> Why don't you and a small handful of other (ISC)2 bashers and
> conspiracy theorists take
> your conspiracies and divisiveness toward other security organizations
> off this list, as Jeff
> and requested, and also as I have requested.
>
> And stop bashing other OWASP members who do not agree with your view.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Regards, Tim
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:04 PM, Stephen Craig Evans
> <stephencraig.evans at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Let's iron out our messages - ideas we can all get behind - before
taking
>> them to the world."
>>
>> In all due respect, Jeff, that is not possible. Tim Bass has injected
>> himself as the ISC2 spokesperson with his OP on their CSSLP
Certification.
>>
>> There's lots of different viewpoints, one here from a person I greatly
>> respect:
>> (ISC)2's Newest Cash Cow: The CSSLP Certification
>> http://www.veracode.com/blog/2008/09/isc2s-newest-cash-cow-csslp/
>>
>> And at the end of Mr. Tipton's prezo at the OWASP NYC conference, he
> mumbled
>> something like "I am not supposed to advertise but I am going to anyway",
>> showing the CSSLP Certification logo at the end of his prezo, so it's
>> entirely appropriate to question ISC2's motives.
>>
>> If you think this should be in a separate thread or on another forum far,
>> far away in a distant galaxy, please say so :-)
>>
>> But this has to be a topic open for discussion, even if it's stepping on
>> ISC2's toes.
>>
>> Just my $.02 worth and I'll be glad to discuss it further in Portugal.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Stephen
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:41 PM, Jeff Williams <jeff.williams at owasp.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Oh man.  I'm really not that guy.  Political correctness is a menace and
> a
>>> bore. J
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> But this is the kind of constructive idea that absolutely we should
>>> discuss.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And I don't mean to discourage or censor discussion on the Leaders list.
>>> This is a place where we can discuss our ideas about the market and
> making
>>> it better.  We just can't use the Leaders list as a weapon.  Let's iron
> out
>>> our messages - ideas we can all get behind - before taking them to the
>>> world.  There will never be a single "voice of OWASP" other than what we
>>> publish in our work.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --Jeff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: owasp-leaders-bounces at lists.owasp.org
>>> [mailto:owasp-leaders-bounces at lists.owasp.org] On Behalf Of McGovern,
> James
>>> F (HTSC, IT)
>>> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 10:52 AM
>>> To: OWASP Leaders
>>> Subject: [Owasp-leaders] IBM and Microsoft
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jeff has scolded many for political incorrectness regarding
> certification.
>>> Figured I would make things worse (or better) by asking another question
>>> that has been bothering me.
>>>
>>> Let's start by acknowledging that both Microsoft and IBM have many IT
>>> literate employees. Both organizations have done wonderful in terms of
>>> sponsorship and providing financial support to OWASP. What would it take
> for
>>> a Microsoft employee for example, to take the OWASP meeting invites for
> say
>>> the Hartford chapter and forward it to all the Microsoft employees in
the
>>> Hartford CT area.
>>>
>>> Likewise, I suspect if you were to overlay the IBM employee map on top
of
>>> the OWASP chapter list, there would be lots of coverage. How do we close
> the
>>> gap in terms of folks within these two firms actually knowing about our
>>> events.
>>>
>>> ************************************************************
>>>
>>> This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of
>>> addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or privileged
>>> information.  If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying,
>>> disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited.  If
you
>>> are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
>>> return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy all copies.
>>>
>>> ************************************************************
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>
>

-- 
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com




More information about the Owasp-board mailing list