[Owasp-board] Fwd: GPC Membership

dinis cruz dinis.cruz at owasp.org
Wed Dec 8 22:17:20 UTC 2010


I will recommend that you take Leo's comments with a pinch of Salt.

There is a lot of history here and unfortunately Leo is a type of OWASP
contributor that likes to be involved in things but doesn't really deliver a
lot (I've seen that happen in a number of cases).

Yes the GPCs meetings might not have been 100% productive all the time
(although we were debating a lot of very important and complex items, and
there was a lot of brainstorming going on), but there is a lot of space at
OWASP to find areas of interrest, and again Leo has show several times that
he prefers to complain about the current situation instead of finding
something else (within the GPC or OWASP) to do.

And on Brazil, he is completely off base. All you guys need to do is to
check out the brazilian conference mailing list to see the integrity
and enormous quantity of work that those guys are doing (even now, two weeks
after the conference has finished)

Dinis Cruz

Blog: http://diniscruz.blogspot.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/DinisCruz
Web: http://www.owasp.org/index.php/O2


On 8 December 2010 20:58, Tom Brennan <tomb at owasp.org> wrote:

> Below is heartbeat from formerly active GPC member - please read twice.
>
> Jason might be best here if you directly communicate with Leo (l
> eo.cavallari at owasp.org) and put new batteries in place to recapture
> volunteer energy.  I always say cheaper and faster to help a existing
> customer then to find a new one...
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *LeoCavallari <leo.cavallari at owasp.org>
> *Date: *December 8, 2010 3:36:01 PM EST
> *To: *Tom Brennan <tomb at owasp.org>
> *Subject: **Re: GPC Membership*
>
> Hi Tom,
>
> Hope you're doing good.
>
> Yes, I agree with Jason statement, but cannot agree unjoining GPC without
> share my point of view.
>
> Besides all my collaboration within OWASP along the years, I got really
> frustrated in two moments and from that time my contributions slowed down to
> zero.
>
> First moment was when Yannis raised a situation about OWASP more than a
> year ago, I took that chance and shared my opinion on what seemed wrong to
> me within OWASP and GP's. My arguments were mainly that I believe that GPC
> was not build to "push buttons" but to make OWASP volunteers to "push the
> right buttons" and also that confcalls were unproductive, since we have 5
> mastermind into a weekly conf to discuss the color and design of project
> status button (believe, it happened...).
> It would be okay if we were seat at a table, drinking beer and
> brainstorming this subject, but at a conf call, with Dinis speaking faster
> than he can, it's not.
> When I put this out to restrict persons and GPC, some OWASP members wrote
> me privately supporting my atitude, but others got angry since they thought
> I had expose OWASP and GPC publicily, what was not true.
>
> OK. GPC, leaded by Dinis, and me had a good conversation, I show my
> position and we tried to rearrange.
>
> The second moment happened during OWASP AppSec Brasil 2009 organization.
> The organization team were made by 4 guys, 3 of them worked for same
> company, which is competitor of mine. Surprisingly, they were the "last
> minute" sponsors.
> Just recall the first investigative case inside OWASP:
> http://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Investigation_-_AppSec_Brazil_2009
>
> I knew that this investigation won't have guilties and innocents, but at
> least lessons learned. What hurts is to see the same problems I had pointed
> out in the past, happening again this year with the same organization team.
> And then, OWASP needs to pay their bills...
>
> To say, GPC is overcharged and it needs not only new blood but remodel a
> tangible roadmap, mission and activities.
> OWASP as a whole needs to set procedures to review and expurgate
> leaders/GC's members that do nothing for community, but only vampire
> benefits with giving anything back.
>
> The next Summit will be a new gold opportunity to make things happen, that
> will be the place to GP's and leaders share their experience and identify DO
> and DON'TS, especifically to GPC it will be a great opportunity to revamp
> its values.
>
> I'll make my efforts to be at the Summit and contribute to make these
> changes happen. If I can't and no significant changes are proposed there,
> I'll be pleasant to quit from GPC and OWASP.
>
> Let me know if it sounds ok for you, Board an GPC.
>
> Fell free to forward this message.
>
> Best regards,
> Leo Cavallari
>
> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Tom Brennan <tomb at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> Leo,
>>
>> Are you in agreement to step down from the GPC making room for new blood -
>> please advise by Friday.
>>
>>
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> *From: *Jason Li <jason.li at owasp.org>
>> *Date: *December 7, 2010 2:30:02 PM EST
>> *To: *Tom Brennan <tomb at owasp.org>
>> *Cc: *Brad Causey <bradcausey at owasp.org>
>> *Subject: **GPC Membership*
>>
>> Tom,
>>
>> As the Board representative to the GPC, I am providing you this email
>> pursuant to the Board's initiative for Committee chairs to identify inactive
>> committee members before the end of the week.
>>
>> Brad is the co-chair of the GPC, and I don't want to speak for him, but I
>> believe he will agree that he and I have been the only active committee
>> members in the last 6 months.
>>
>> Pravir and Leonardo have not been responsive for some time.
>>
>> -Jason
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20101208/e08d3dff/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list