[Owasp-board] Member Nation Portal

Josh Sokol josh.sokol at owasp.org
Mon Apr 7 16:47:40 UTC 2014


That's fair and my apologies.  Sarah has logged in and posted three times
in May-June, 2013.  Matt Tesauro as well.  No others.

~josh


On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:

>  Fair comment from Sarah. When I logged into Ning yesterday, she was one
> of the "featured profiles" on the main page.
>
> FWIW,
> Jim
>
>
> On 4/7/14, 9:02 AM, Sarah Baso wrote:
>
> I am online reviewing all the questions now and will provide a
> consolidated response as soon as I can.  Josh, FWIW, I have not only logged
> into NING but made posts to it, so I don't think its fair to say none of
> the staff has awareness of it.
>
>  Sarah
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>>  http://myowasp.force.com
>>
>>  Based on your experience with Meetup, Tom, I'd be especially interested
>> in what you have to say about it's features vs what Meetup has to offer.
>>
>>  Another thought on this...being that we pride ourselves on being open,
>> why is the first thing people see when trying to access our social media
>> platform a login page?
>>
>>  ~josh
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Tom Brennan <tomb at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Who is in the Alpha testing group?  Would be great to have a preview ....
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Michael,
>>> >
>>> > This is why I want to caution the team that it's very likely the the
>>> > community will not use the social features of the new portal. I could
>>> be
>>> > wrong, it's just a polite warning to consider.
>>> >
>>> > Now, if the SalesForce features are being used for finance management
>>> (pay
>>> > for events, pay for membership, etc) I'm all for it. We need a more
>>> robust
>>> > payment system. I just don't think new social features will stick.
>>> >
>>> > - Jim
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 4/6/14, 8:09 PM, Josh Sokol wrote:
>>> >
>>> > To a large extent I agree with you.  The key difference here is that
>>> we are
>>> > talking about replacing an existing platform with over 300
>>> participants for
>>> > a brand new, sub-par, social media experience.  We've had enough issues
>>> > getting members to use social media in general, why would we want to
>>> roll
>>> > with anuything with such limited functionality and flexibility?
>>> >
>>> > I have followed up with Sarah and she said she will provide an update
>>> > tomorrow.
>>> >
>>> > On Apr 6, 2014 9:48 PM, "Michael Coates" <michael.coates at owasp.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> I wouldn't be concerned. When evaluating many products the evaluation
>>> does
>>> >> not require a demo for every system. If the motivation was to
>>> centralize and
>>> >> integrate with sales force then I'd expect that to be a top
>>> requirement and
>>> >> consideration.
>>> >>
>>> >> But again, we should let Sarah update us.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Apr 6, 2014 7:13 PM, "Josh Sokol" <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Considering that none of them have even logged into the current Ning
>>> >>> social media platform, I have to assume that their evaluations were
>>> based
>>> >>> solely on the functionality that they wanted, rather than what would
>>> benefit
>>> >>> the OWASP community as a whole.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> ~josh
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 7:16 PM, Michael Coates <
>>> michael.coates at owasp.org>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I know there is a ton of integration into our existing sales force
>>> data
>>> >>>> and many other benefits when Sarah and team evaluated. I'll wait
>>> for Sarah's
>>> >>>> update and thoughts.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Apr 6, 2014 4:35 PM, "Josh Sokol" <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Last week I spent some time with Kate going through the
>>> functionality
>>> >>>>> and features of the Salesforce Communities and I have to say that
>>> I'm a bit
>>> >>>>> disgruntled.  For two years now we've had the http://my.owasp.orgNing site
>>> >>>>> with way more features and over 300 members and now we want to
>>> move to this
>>> >>>>> Salesforce portal thing?  Maybe if some of the staff took the time
>>> to use
>>> >>>>> the existing social media platform, then they would realize just
>>> how much
>>> >>>>> this Salesforce one sucks.  And I'm working on the conversion to
>>> Ning 3.0
>>> >>>>> right now which adds a ton of additional features as well
>>> >>>>> (http://myowasp2.ning.com).  It looks better, works better, and
>>> already has
>>> >>>>> some level of backing from our membership.  Why would we roll out
>>> a lesser
>>> >>>>> version of what we already have?  I went into this with the hopes
>>> that the
>>> >>>>> new platform would blow Ning out of the water and I could get rid
>>> of it, but
>>> >>>>> I left feeling like we should still maintain the Ning platform
>>> because
>>> >>>>> Salesforce just doesn't have the features necessary to be usable.
>>>  Simple
>>> >>>>> things like rich text formatting, user messaging, photo sharing,
>>> video
>>> >>>>> sharing, etc.  If we had nothing, then it would work, but why
>>> anyone would
>>> >>>>> prefer Salesforce over Ning is beyond me.  In addition, I'll note
>>> that the
>>> >>>>> "Logout" link in this Salesforce portal does not exist on every
>>> page which
>>> >>>>> makes it difficult for users to log out and can become a security
>>> issue.
>>> >>>>> Needless to say, this is very frustrating.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> ~josh
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org>
>>> >>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Sarah/Michael,
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> The original proposal for the member nation portal discussed that
>>> it
>>> >>>>>> would manage "event types, memberships, and donations as well as
>>> an
>>> >>>>>> integrated eCommerce solution". This is awesome. I think will be
>>> a great
>>> >>>>>> thing for the community and staff.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/a/owasp.org/document/d/1yDTFCdmmZN3t732sqHTOFHMhQrXgUC46YbgDhGROcXM/edit?pli=1
>>> >>>>>> Did we also plan to use this for application security/wiki
>>> content or
>>> >>>>>> for OWASP project management? We never discussed that when we
>>> voted on the
>>> >>>>>> member nation proposal. I though the portal was mostly going to
>>> be for
>>> >>>>>> eCommerce streamlining, like the proposal said.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Has the scope grown? Sarah, can you give the board an update on
>>> the
>>> >>>>>> member nation portal and what it's purpose will be? I see from
>>> recent email
>>> >>>>>> that we plan to use it for project management? What will that
>>> look like?
>>> >>>>>> Thanks all, Jim
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>>>> 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 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
>>
>>
>
>
>  --
>  Executive Director
> OWASP Foundation
>
>  sarah.baso at owasp.org
> +1.312.869.2779
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing listOwasp-board at lists.owasp.orghttps://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20140407/7aa39833/attachment.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list