[Owasp-board] Survey monkey request for chapter donations

Josh Sokol josh.sokol at owasp.org
Fri Jun 1 19:12:56 UTC 2012


Well, since it would be sent out in some official capacity by the OWASP
Foundation, it doesn't say that it isn't mandatory, and it does not having
a "we elect not to donate" option, it definitely has a "mandatory" vibe to
me.  It doesn't have to actually say "mandatory" for someone to interpret
it that way.

~josh

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Eoin <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:

> This is by no means mandatory, where does it say that?
>
> Eoin Keary
> BCC Risk Advisory
> Owasp Global Board
> +353 87 977 2988
>
>
> On 1 Jun 2012, at 14:37, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>
> I have some general objections to the idea of taking money from the
> chapters in order to fund the projects, but so far I've let those slide as
> this was supposed to be an optional contribution for chapters.  This survey
> indicates quite the opposite.
>
> To start with, it needs to say that this is "*NOT MANDATORY*" or "*
> OPTIONAL*" (which I don't care) in the intro paragraph.  Preferably that
> text should be all caps and bold in order to avoid any confusion for
> chapter leaders.
>
> Next, if you are not going to take me up on my original feedback to make
> this a fill-in-the-blank for a donation amount, then there unquestionably
> needs to be an "*I choose not to donate at this time.*" option.  As of
> your current survey form the minimum amount a leader could elect is 5% and
> that equates to a significant amount of money for a fair number of chapters.
>
> Finally, I again suggest that this be a fill-in-the-blank for the donation
> amount.  The current approach is far too restrictive and I'd also imagine
> many leaders would just select the "0%" option to avoid having to do the
> math involved with calculating percentages.
>
> It also might not be a bad idea to highlight some of the projects that you
> plan on rebooting and what the money would be used for.  "More visible",
> "higher quality" and "more relevant" are fluff terms.  When you're talking
> about taking money from one group in order to give it to another you need
> to have a solid plan in place on what the money will actually be spent on.
>
> ~josh
>
> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Eoin <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/OWASP-REBOOT
>> Guys, take a look at this, feedback appreciated.
>> Would like to email leaders tomorrow.
>>
>>
>> Eoin Keary
>> BCC Risk Advisory
>> Owasp Global Board
>> +353 87 977 2988
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20120601/f85d3f36/attachment.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list