[Owasp-board] Electronic Vote
seba at owasp.org
Wed Apr 27 12:39:40 UTC 2011
Hi Matt, All,
Is it feasible to have your "how to allocate OWASP funds" proposal by the
next board call next Monday?
Did you have a change to look at the questions/remarks I had on the new
I propose to add a paragraph on local chapters governance. Something along
the lines of:
Local Chapters Governance
A local OWASP chapter may establish local chapters within the geographical
boundary of a chapter, such as country or a city. The bylaws of a chapter
must not contain anything that is at variance with the expressed purposes of
the OWASP Foundation or with the OWASP Foundation Bylaws, and must be
approved as specified by the OWASP Foundation board of directors before
becoming effective. A chapter may not change its bylaws, its name, or its
boundaries without approval as specified by the OWASP Foundation. Chapter
Bylaws may be produced in the native language of a nation, but must be
translated into English for submission to the OWASP Foundation.
The chapter leader and local chapter board has to manage the local chapter
according the guidance and rules defined in the Chapter Leader Handbook. The
Global Chapters Committee provides the support required by the local
chapters to thrive and contribute to the overall mission and goals of the
The OWASP Foundation may, by affirmative vote of at majority of the board of
directors, suspend or annul a chapter if, in the judgment of the board of
directors, such action is in the best interests of the OWASP Foundation.
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Matt Tesauro <matt.tesauro at owasp.org>wrote:
> Eoin: I agree with staggering but technically speaking, that's not what
> we're voting on. We should communicate this to the committee chairs first.
> I sat in on the committee chair call earlier in the week and warned those
> on that call that OWASP is not flush with cash and we may need to scale back
> the committee budgets in the near term. However, we need to make sure
> committees understand this is not us hindering their work but the current
> fiscal realities.
> My votes:
> No on remaining budgets.
> More time is needed to understand fully the impact of the summit's
> expense on this years budget.
> No on the ByLaws.
> I'd like to have some time to review what Seba sent.
> I propose we re-vote these issues next Friday (April 22) to give us the
> time to look into them - especially the budget issue.
> I also have a proposal I'll be crafting on how to allocate OWASP funds
> going forward with respect to the global committees and overarching expenses
> (those that touch multiple committees). However, I need some more time with
> the numbers I got from Alison before I can make a specific proposal.
> -- Matt Tesauro
> OWASP Board Member
> OWASP WTE Project Lead
> http://AppSecLive.org <http://appseclive.org/> - Community and Download
> On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 4:46 AM, Eoin <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:
>> Yes, bit let's stagger committee funding or provide when required.
>> Sent from my HTC hero.
>> owasp board member
>> On 15 Apr 2011 13:48, "seba seba" <seba at owasp.org> wrote:
>> 1. Yes, but under the condition that these are part of an overall 2011
>> 2. No - I have some questions & remarks on the Bylaws attached. There are
>> references that are not clear, roles that are not defined and committee's of
>> which no governance is defined. Furthermore I'd like to add a paragraph that
>> clarifies the International role which provides a legal umbrella for legal
>> entities in other countries or regions that fall under it.
>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Kate Hartmann <kate.hartmann at owasp.org>
>> > As per the board...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Owasp-board