[Owasp-board] [Owasp-leaders] (Projects Reboot 2012) Re: OWASP 2014 - Strategic Goals

Eoin Keary eoin.keary at owasp.org
Wed Nov 13 14:08:43 UTC 2013


Come on!!!
The policy was drafted because of me??
Sarah, please end these lies. This is totally unacceptable.

Eoin Keary
Owasp Global Board
+353 87 977 2988


On 13 Nov 2013, at 10:58, "Dennis Groves" <dennis.groves at owasp.org> wrote:

> Hello Sarah,
> 
> With all due respect, I genuinely wish such a thing were possible. As I have stated before, Eoin has many great qualities about him. I personally supported him in getting project reboot started, and his willingness to take action where others did not has led to many positive changes in the community.
> 
> However, why would I ever choose to pick up a phone and call somebody who is so abusive to others?
> 
> Eoin is so abusive that you personally had to draft an Anti-Harassment Policy specifically because of his behavior toward you and your staff (to say nothing of the volunteers). Eoin also consistently does not give credit where credit is due; he claims successes for himself. He does not take responsibility for his actions when things go wrong, rather he blames others.
> 
> Those maybe great business skills, but OWASP marches to a different ethical drum. And since all of you agree with me in private, I know you that you know what I am saying is accurate. And why is that? It is because you have the same experiences!
> 
> I just want Eoin to give credit where credit is due, and stop behaving poorly to others; two things I believe his consistent patterns of behavior seem to indicate he is incapable of doing.
> 
> Therefore, I fully stand by my statement that a board level position requires a much higher standard of behavior than Eoin currently exhibits. Eoin can be a tremendous asset to the community, and I feel that he should continue to do so as a volunteer.
> 
> This is my final public email on the subject, I suggest we all speak face to face at AppSec.
> 
> 
> Dennis
> 
> P.S. Attached email - Evidentially, Eoin disagree's with me and claims he can spend OWASP foundation money however he chooses, and I rebut.
> 
> 
> On 13 Nov 2013, at 1:32, Sarah Baso wrote:
> 
>> Thanks Josh.
>> 
>> I wanted to echo Josh's sentiments and ask that you (Dennis and Eoin)
>> continue this conversation offline (if it is necessary).
>> 
>> I think this back and forth has been a series of poor communication (or
>> lack of communication) and operating on different sets of assumptions.  As
>> a global community that works remotely and communicates via email, we all
>> need to try hard to pick up the phone where necessary and also I would like
>> to think we can give our colleagues and peers in OWASP the benefit of the
>> doubt. I don't think Eoin or anyone else was defrauding OWASP.
>> 
>> The staff is working hard at setting better policies and financial
>> communication methods to help make sure that there isn't ongoing confusion
>> about who is getting what money and where guidelines we need to follow to
>> comply with terms of our grants as well as donor intent.  I would like to
>> see the board not be involved in the day to day management of funds going
>> forward, but instead directing questions and submitting expense requests
>> (as applicable) per the standard policies set for the organization.  I
>> think we are getting there....
>> 
>> On a positive note, just think if this energy of all of us (staff, board
>> members, and volunteers) was spent working towards our mission instead of
>> rehashing the same argument in a nonproductive way 10 times!?
>> 
>> Let's refocus on the strategic goal discussion -- and Eoin, i haven't seen
>> you bring up your cause of Developer Outreach that we discussed in Germany.
>> I assume you still feel strongly about that specifically being called out
>> in the goals for the upcoming year? (which i agree with).  Are there
>> certain metrics you think we could use to measure impact on the community
>> in this area?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Sarah
>> 
>> -- 
>> Executive Director
>> OWASP Foundation
>> 
>> sarah.baso at owasp.org
>> +1.312.869.2779
> .eml"
> Content-Type: message/rfc822
> 
> Return-Path: <dennis.groves at owasp.org>
> Received: from [192.168.0.11] (ip70-176-208-182.ph.ph.cox.net. [70.176.208.182])
>        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fk4sm64678399pab.23.1969.12.31.16.00.00
>        (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
>        Thu, 10 Oct 2013 13:11:04 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "Dennis Groves" <dennis.groves at owasp.org>
> To: "Eoin Keary" <eoin.keary at owasp.org>
> Cc: "Michael Coates" <michael.coates at owasp.org>,
> "OWASP Foundation Board List" <owasp-board at lists.owasp.org>
> Subject: Re: [Owasp-board] Ciso project funding
> Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 13:09:53 -0700
> Message-ID: <026FAD87-AEB7-4FF3-B741-D7EF0B2FC9C7 at owasp.org>
> In-Reply-To: <575572C3-1E31-49F7-A3B6-86614CC6AB45 at owasp.org>
> References: <45D2D9EA-52A8-460F-899D-3EF272822446 at owasp.org>
> <CAAihoGvaNVwMB9BqvAYMaDQ0RtAfLrAnJ5++gL6swY0kRa3Sig at mail.gmail.com>
> <52558E35.1030800 at owasp.org>
> <CAKA9LHzrfasdZQRd_WJCbYUQv13=Q5NjPtyipKMKSkfJr+c6OQ at mail.gmail.com>
> <F217543E-1894-46BA-8E7E-E3EB35DF0870 at owasp.org>
> <CA+EttN9aUP7kQ9YwsJOu1SMWayq7WUt_zc2DGD0weY-QBHbmww at mail.gmail.com>
> <CAKA9LHw1NJgy0mnckB2-p+vh+6QPfjYipQ2aoioGeEn4041Gyw at mail.gmail.com>
> <CAB0dSK5wkTJEHDuvxwTSgQQZS-+6_95Lx8qcjHiz8fE8i+aHSw at mail.gmail.com>
> <CA+EttN-V-dqYERWKUdBnLAqeW-Npamw6QiLBd_MFMBXzBz2X2g at mail.gmail.com>
> <CAB0dSK7DJny0xAtx33LV4kHCkH+QWAaQDCe+DUPRH7h+iQeOcQ at mail.gmail.com>
> <CAKA9LHyZ6gpxw1CB2_7s1NDhUXA_gEWjbmNAf0b=J8agx==eRw at mail.gmail.com>
> <CAKA9LHxmP8QcdS0kHMKtkErFgS7oDpb2iWfNJn4PuBiMXh6CFQ at mail.gmail.com>
> <575572C3-1E31-49F7-A3B6-86614CC6AB45 at owasp.org>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="=_MailMate_217E594D-4778-4A95-8257-48498648C9B4_="
> X-Mailer: MailMate (1.6r3549)
> 
> 
> --=_MailMate_217E594D-4778-4A95-8257-48498648C9B4_=
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; markup=markdown
> 
> On 10 Oct 2013, at 12:24, Eoin Keary wrote:
> 
>> I disagree. What are the chapter funds doing for our mission? $270k or 
>> so?
>> OWASP has benefited the banks more than appsec.
> 
> Disagree all you want. This is a matter of law in the USA. As a 
> registered non-profit - we are actually already required by law to spend 
> the money as earmarked by the donators. And not only must we do this we 
> must be able to demonstrate our compliance with the donators wishes. 
> Incidentally the IRS does audit for this regularly; and it is the 
> fastest way to loose your non-profit status.
> 
> For example: The DHS money is not available to spend as we like, no 
> matter how much we need it for anything else; it must be spent as the 
> DHS dictates, end of!
> 
> *** OWASP can not continue to "spend" money earmarked for other purposes 
> or we will be forced to stop trading! ***
> 
> 
> Respectfully,
> 
> 
> [Dennis Groves](http://about.me/dennis.groves), MSc
> [Email me](mailto:dennis.groves at owasp.org) or [schedule a 
> meeting](http://goo.gl/8sPIy).
> 
>     Unless someone like you...cares a whole awful lot...
>     nothing is going to get better...It's not."
>                                             -- The Lorax
> --=_MailMate_217E594D-4778-4A95-8257-48498648C9B4_=
> Content-Type: text/html
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> <div class=3D"markdown">
> <p dir=3D"auto">On 10 Oct 2013, at 12:24, Eoin Keary wrote:</p>
> 
> <blockquote>
> <p dir=3D"auto">I disagree. What are the chapter funds doing for our miss=
> ion? $270k or so?<br>
> OWASP has benefited the banks more than appsec.</p>
> </blockquote>
> 
> <p dir=3D"auto">Disagree all you want. This is a matter of law in the USA=
> =2E As a registered non-profit - we are actually already required by law =
> to spend the money as earmarked by the donators. And not only must we do =
> this we must be able to demonstrate our compliance with the donators wish=
> es. Incidentally the IRS does audit for this regularly; and it is the fas=
> test way to loose your non-profit status.</p>
> 
> <p dir=3D"auto">For example: The DHS money is not available to spend as w=
> e like, no matter how much we need it for anything else; it must be spent=
> as the DHS dictates, end of!</p>
> 
> <p dir=3D"auto">*** OWASP can not continue to "spend" money ear=
> marked for other purposes or we will be forced to stop trading! ***</p>
> 
> <p dir=3D"auto">Respectfully,</p>
> 
> <p dir=3D"auto"><a href=3D"http://about.me/dennis.groves">Dennis Groves</=
> a>, MSc<br>
> <a href=3D"mailto:dennis.groves at owasp.org">Email me</a> or <a href=3D"htt=
> p://goo.gl/8sPIy">schedule a meeting</a>.</p>
> 
> <pre><code>Unless someone like you...cares a whole awful lot...
> nothing is going to get better...It's not."
>                                        -- The Lorax
> </code></pre>
> 
> </div>
> --=_MailMate_217E594D-4778-4A95-8257-48498648C9B4_=--


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list