[Owasp-board] Member Nation Portal

Sarah Baso sarah.baso at owasp.org
Mon Apr 7 19:16:28 UTC 2014


Dear Board members -


I have attempted to put together some additional details on the scope of
work for the Member Nation interface and community portal which runs on the
salesforce platform.  Also, I tried to answer the questions (mostly from
Jim and Josh) , but if others have questions, please send them my way.


One preliminary matter on Alpha testing - All of the staff members, Simon
Bennets, and Fabio Cerullo, Colin Watson, David Hughes.  Additionally, Kate
did a demo/walk through with the AppSec USA 2014 Team in Denver for their
upcoming event registration.


Here are the links for you all to test look at where we are currently:


   - New Membership: https://myowasp.force.com/memberappregion
   - Portal - https://myowasp.force.com

It is important to note that becoming a member does not automatically sign
a person up for the portal.

#######  Details on the proposal, functionality, Q & A #########




Original proposal -
https://docs.google.com/a/owasp.org/document/d/1yDTFCdmmZN3t732sqHTOFHMhQrXgUC46YbgDhGROcXM/edit?pli=1





*What features we prioritized operationally:*


   - Membership Management
   - Event Registration
   - Central location for managing community roles and details - this is
   for both the staff and the community.

o   *Staff *- we have ONE central database (Salesforce) where we can track
any individual or company OWASP interacts with as well as any number of
details about them including:

§  *Contact details *- email address(es), phone number(s), mailing
address(s),

§  *Chapter and Project Affiliation *- are they affiliated with a chapter
(and allocating membership funds), are they a chapter leader (or past
chapter leader, project leader, project contributor

§  *Membership details and history *- paid member (including how long they
have been a paid member or if they were in the past but aren't now), who do
they work for and is that company a member or have they sponsored an event,

§  *Events, Training and Talk history *- has the individual or company done
training for us (which class, where, what were the course reviews, how much
did we charge), has the individual done a talk at any of our conferences,
have they attended any of our events - if so, which ones, what courses did
they register for.

§  *Contracts *- has that individual signed any contracts with the
Foundation (and a copy of the contracts),

§  *Email records *- have they been contacted with questions about their
chapter (or any email we send through Salesforce or vertical response).

§  *Volunteerism *- we are working on integrating the metrics of
volunteerism, what initiatives are they involved with, what hours/work have
they done or signed up to do, volunteer skills or preferences.



There are additional things we can track for things like projects and
chapters and initiatives - as groupings - how many active chapters do we
have, when was a chapter restarted, who are the current chapter leaders.
For projects, there are any numbers of metrics we can track here as well.



*In addition to tracking all these details, we can run reports on all of it
to get more accurate metrics on everything from chapter and project
activity, to membership and events.  Just imagine all the fields above (and
anything else you can think to add) and being able to measure the details.
One thing that the board (understandably) has been asking for more and more
is metrics - so we can measure our programs and activity.  We need a place
to track the data and easily measure it... the wiki is a great place for
collaboration and creating content, but not for generating metrics on all
of the data above.*



o   *Community *-

§  Think about all of the data above and how it currently (or historically
gets collected) - it is a NIGHTMARE to keep all of it up to date for a
community our size.  *We want to have a place that is one stop for
community members to go and be able to access and update their OWASP
Foundation information* - update their contact details, update data about
their chapter or project (or participation there in), get current list of
the memberships affiliated with their chapter and other financial details,
get information about their membership (both individual and corporate,
including invoices/receipts), information about past events they have
attended and what events they can register for now.

§  While we are an "Open" community we need to be clear with what that
openness means for our community members and what data is accessible to
others in the organization.  Through MemberNation and the Community Portal
(running on the salesforce platform) we will be able to have different
access rights based on roles for ALL of the above information- not only
read but edit.   Additionally, we can set up triggers for the staff so we
are aware when certain changes are made so we can have workflows to support
things like chapter leader transition.

§  Specific to membership & events - Despite what may seem simple... there
are a lot of variable features that our community requires for both of
these items particularly as they work together.

o   Events - We wanted a system that would dynamically be able to check an
individuals contact record for their current membership and type
(individual, corporate, academic) and provide the appropriate discounted
conference pricing. This is the fee for current individual members as well
as employees of companies that have corporate memberships (i.e. 10% for the
contributor level)   Additionally, a system that would allow for the
purchase of membership as part of a conference registration and then update
the contact record.  Furthermore, we have discount codes and multiple
currencies.

o   Membership - not only does someone just choose to become a member and
pay $50, we have different membership prices based on region, contacts that
are the POC for multiple memberships (individual, corporate, academic), the
need for receipts, being able to select a chapter/project to allocate to,
and email notifications when the membership is expiring soon.

§  Additionally - for those people that want to purchase a membership or
register for an event, but don't care about the portal or accessing their
details - they can do those things without the portal (like guest check
out).





*What it is:*


   - All the things listed above including Membership management, event
   management, contact management
   - Additionally, the system supports the following functionality -
   community forums (similar to google groups), a place to post ideas (and
   community members can vote up/down) polling, document/file repository,



*Upcoming Features include (not an exhaustive list):*


   -  Donations & Fundraising
   -  Chapter, Project, Initiative - group details management
   - Centralized CFP & CFT system (for event planners and for community
   members to know what is open/available)
   - Awards & recognition
   - Reporting and dashboards



*What it isn't (and what it isn't meant to replace)*


   - It isn't a social media or meeting platform such as NING, Facebook, or
   Meetup.  MANY of our community members use these (and more). We aren't
   hoping to replace them or replicate all of their features.  Local
   chapters and volunteers are going to continue to do what works best for
   them in their region and based on the needs of their group.
   - A wiki or place for collaboration
   - A project management platform



*Support from the board - success or failure*

If the board is saying this is stupid, doesn't work, etc - of course people
in the community are going to follow suit.  I hope that you all can take a
look, vocalize your constructive critisism and we can improve, make
adjustments where needed.  Ultimately, you may not love the portal, but I
hope you can at least respect the time and energy that we are putting into
a functional solution.





*Questions (my answers in line)*



*From Jim*

Did we also plan to use this for application security/wiki content or for
OWASP project management? No, we can make some content available on there
(like ebooks or other documentation of policies as ANOTHER PLACE to find
things, but not to replace the wiki or sere as a project management
platform. We never discussed that when we voted on the member nation
proposal. Correct I though the portal was mostly going to be for eCommerce
streamlining, like the proposal said.  The proposal included eCommerce, but
also says "Some of the included solutions are:  membership management,
community forums, events, eCommerce, fundraising, task groups, chapters,
awards, volunteer management, and reporting and dashboards." This doesn't
mean we have to use all these features, but they are included.


Has the scope grown? No Sarah, can you give the board an update on the
member nation portal and what it's purpose will be? Hopefully addressed
above... let me know if it is unclear or you have more questions. I see from
recent email that we plan to use it for project management? What will that
look like? Not project management, but contact and data management.





*From Josh -*

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.org Ning site
with way more features and over 300 members and now we want to move to this
Salesforce portal thing?  Yes, but not meant to replace or replicate
NING.  There
are some overlapping functionalities, but obviously the needs of your
chapter may be more suitable to NING (just as facebook and meet up have
worked for many others).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.  I think we are operating on a different set of
criteria and expectations.  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?  Because NING doesn't support the above
(and more) features. 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. In
the member portal there is a clear logout button next to your name/profile
at the top of the left hand navigation.  If you are in the community
interface, if you click on your name in the upper right, Log out is in the
drop down similar to how it works on other software. Needless to say, this
is very frustrating.  I am sorry you feel so frustrated, but I hope you can
understand based on the above the multitude of functionality we are trying
to support on a global scale and our inability to be everything to
everyone.





More from Josh:

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.  Again, we aren't looking
for something to be a great social media experience.  We can work on
integration of more social media features... but our primary needs were
related to the notes above.  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?


####################


Best Regards,

Sarah Baso




On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:

> 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
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Executive Director
OWASP Foundation

sarah.baso at owasp.org
+1.312.869.2779
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20140407/9a1f716e/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list