[Owasp-board] OWASP Community Vote - Board Review

Dennis Groves dennis.groves at owasp.org
Wed Apr 2 15:27:35 UTC 2014

+1 Josh, it couldn't have been said better.

Phoenix chapter participants are con junkies and we would have to close our
chapter to stop talking about the other con's - and I recon the guys would
still gather at the bar to discuss what the next con's to attend are. There
is no doubt that this is commercial; hell OWASP even has cross-advertising
agreements with some of them; so we are compelled to inform people about

One Size does not fit all.


On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 8:16 AM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:

> No offense meant, but this is spoken like a guy who has not run a
> chapter.  Quite frequently our leaders are presented with opportunities.
> Many of these opportunities, while backed by commercial interests, are
> offered for free or at significantly reduced cost to OWASP members.
> Passing those opportunities along to members does not imply support of a
> vendor, merely that an opportunity exists that could provide value.  If you
> want to add a disclaimer at the bottom of messages saying that the OWASP
> Foundation does not endorse product or services, then I have no issue with
> that, other than how you're ever going to actually enforce it.  The only
> issue with being vendor agnostic comes if a leader is excluding one vendor,
> but allowing another in similar circumstances.  Do you have examples where
> this is the case?
> My thought is that if we are going to generate a rule on this, it should
> be that commericial SPAM from any vendor is not allowed on the mailing
> lists, but it can be sent to the chapter leader for review and to pass
> along if it provides value to our membership.  A great example is the
> Innotech Conference that comes to Austin annually.  It's definitely a
> commercial, for-profit, venture, but each year they provide us with a free
> attendance code to provide to our membership.  It definitely provides value
> as they have lots of technology tracks and even a security track there.
> Why would I not want to provide my membership with that opportunity just
> because it is backed by a company that makes money?
> I don't agree with the "let's make exceptions" approach either.  Too much
> red tape for something that should be in our leaders hands anyway.  We
> should trust our leadership to do the right thing, but have a process in
> place to handle when they don't.
> ~josh
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 4:41 AM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>  I tend to agree with Eoin on this point. We really need to limit any
>> appearance of commercial activity.  I would support a rule where "no
>> commercial spamming on OWASP lists" is the norm. We would have the make
>> exceptions such as ads in the the newsletter and similar...
>> Before making this call I think we should talk to the other chapter
>> leaders in regards to what they think about this.
>> - Jim
>> On 4/1/14, 8:57 AM, Eoin Keary wrote:
>> We don't want to jeopardise out charity status by promoting commercial
>> activities. A rule helps prevent that. A community vote help establish the
>> rule.
>> Just sayin...
>> Eoin Keary
>> Owasp Global Board
>> +353 87 977 2988
>> On 1 Apr 2014, at 19:04, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>>   Sure.  But sometimes chapters only have one person at the helm.  And
>> if the leader is being selective without a good reason, then hopefully that
>> gets brought to the attention of our staff or the Board and we can handle
>> it.  I don't think this is an issue until it is an issue.
>>  ~josh
>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Eoin Keary <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>  There may be conflict of interest/bias at play if decision issue by 1
>>> person.
>>> Eoin Keary
>>> Owasp Global Board
>>> +353 87 977 2988 <%2B353%2087%20977%202988>
>>> On 1 Apr 2014, at 17:12, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>   My personal feeling is that any advertisements should be sent to the
>>> chapter leader and not to the list.  The chapter leader then has the
>>> responsibility to decide if the offer is of value to the members and
>>> whether to pass it along or not.
>>>  ~josh
>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Fabio Cerullo <fcerullo at owasp.org>wrote:
>>>> hi there,
>>>>  I'm going to submit a community vote to the leaders list this Friday
>>>> 4th April.
>>>>  *OWASP "No-Advertising" Policy*
>>>>  At present our rules are not clear on commercial advertising through
>>>> the OWASP mailing lists and some chapters allow this and others don't.  It
>>>> has been suggested to have a "no advertising" policy on all of our mailing
>>>> lists.  So then the question is "what is advertising?"  Any commercial
>>>> activity such as training, consulting services, or paid conferences. These
>>>> activities have to be reviewed and handled by OWASP HQ before posting them
>>>> to the mailing lists.
>>>> https://docs.google.com/a/owasp.org/forms/d/1R_u0eRFsc5VQpmcWelUfck5hDuLPsmEpA_jDHKu87Qk/viewform
>>>>  Your comments are welcome.
>>>>  Thanks
>>>> Fabio
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Owasp-board mailing list
>>>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>>   _______________________________________________
>>> Owasp-board mailing list
>>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>> _______________________________________________
>> Owasp-board mailing listOwasp-board at lists.owasp.orghttps://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board

Dennis Groves <http://about.me/dennis.groves>, MSc
Email me, <dennis.groves at owasp.org> or schedule a meeting<http://goo.gl/8sPIy>
*This email is licensed under a CC BY-ND 3.0
<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/deed.en_GB> license.*
Stand up for your freedom to install free
Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents.
Send OpenDocument <http://fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument/> instead!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20140402/e3db048f/attachment.html>

More information about the Owasp-board mailing list