[Owasp-board] GCC Statement for June Board Meeting

Eoin eoin.keary at owasp.org
Tue Jun 7 20:13:53 UTC 2011

We do need to discuss but in essence I agree with both of the points raised.

On 7 June 2011 17:02, Mark Bristow <mark.bristow at owasp.org> wrote:

> OWASP Board,
> The board is planning on taking on two issues that deeply involve the
> Global Conferences Committee at this months meeting, Conferences
> responsibilities (moving Regional/Local events under the Chapters Committee)
> and the GCC policy for profit sharing.  Unfortunately I will be unable to
> make this meeting (it it's today it's because of work, next week because
> I'll have a newborn).  I would really appreciate it if these topics could be
> tabled until I am able to participate in the discussions as they are
> essential to my committee function and I unfortunately can just not make it.
> Should the board not wish to table these issues until I am available, in
> addition to the normal committee update I have prepared two wiki documents
> outlining our potion.  I am going to provide a synopsis here, but strongly
> urge you all to read the entire position as I back them up with some hard
> numbers and facts in the complete version.
> *Moving Regional/Local events to Chapter's Control -
> https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Committee_Supervison_of_Events_Rational*
> My main point here is *why*?  The Conferences Committee is comprised of
> members who have the experience, knowledge and experience to ensure that
> larger OWASP events are run in a manner consistent with the values of the
> foundation as well as in an open and fiscally responsible manor. Over the
> past 2 years under the Conferences Committee’s leadership, we’ve seen OWASP
> grow from having one, perhaps two global events each year to having a Global
> AppSec Conference in North America, South America, Europe and Asia every
> year in addition to increasing the number of regional and local events we
> participate in worldwide. Under GCC stewardship we have also seen a
> significant increase in profitability for events that provide the engine to
> drive OWASP’s activities worldwide.  Last year conference income accounted
> for *77% of OWASP's annual income* and brought in a total profit of
> $240,399.71 (up 151% from 2009).
> I have a suspicious feeling that this initiative is really a different
> venue for a small number of individuals who object to one and only one of
> the GCC policies on profit sharing (see separate data below) what was voted
> on by the GCC and ratified by the board.  If so, then this entire issue
> should be dropped and those individuals should challenge the policy not the
> committee.  However, If the GCC is not meeting the needs of the foundation
> or is doing an ineffective job of managing OWASP events, then I would like
> to hear where exactly we are not doing well so we have the opportunity to
> improve VS taking this responsibility away and putting it in the hands of a
> committee who is not focused on events and does not have the expertise in
> this area.  Keep in mind that event income is what effectively funds much of
> the foundation (along with membership income) and should not be changed
> lightly as mismanagement in this area could be disastrous for OWASP.
> (Additional points can be found by following the link)
> *Event Profit Sharing Policy -
> https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Confernece_Profit_Sharing_Split_Rationale*
> (FYI there are *charts, analysis and data* in the full document)
> The current policy as set by the Global Conferences Committee and the OWASP
> Board should remain in effect. OWASP events are the cornerstone of the OWASP
> Foundation's solvency and provide the necessary funding to enable virtually
> all of OWASP's activities. In 2010, conference income accounted for 77% of
> OWASP's annual income and brought in a total profit of $240,399.71 which
> enabled the foundation to have a net positive income while still funding all
> of its operational activities as well as projects, chapters, loss-leader
> events and outreach. The current profit sharing policy with caps is in the
> best interests of the Foundation as a whole while also recognizing OWASP
> chapters who host OWASP events, by providing them some share in the profits
> the OWASP foundation makes from events. Discussions around removing caps
> will result in significant detriment to the OWASP Foundation's budget (for
> 2010 loss of $33,011.37 instead of a net gain of $4,972.63) and would
> concentrate a huge amount of OWASP funds into the hands on a few few
> chapters, potentially inhibiting OWASP from accomplishing its mission. The
> current policy is both fair and equitable.
> --
> Mark Bristow
> (703) 596-5175
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board

Eoin Keary
OWASP Global Board Member
OWASP Code Review Guide Lead Author

Sent from my i-Transmogrifier
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20110607/6f74a9f9/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Owasp-board mailing list