[Owasp-board] Member Nation Portal

Dennis Groves dennis.groves at owasp.org
Mon Apr 7 23:07:55 UTC 2014


I recommend that we evaluate the platforms and then try and see the values
each offers. Then we can have a reasonable discussion of the options to
decide what is best for OWASP.

Cheers,

Dennis

Sent from my phone, apologies for the brevity and spelling errors.
On Apr 7, 2014 4:01 PM, "Eoin Keary" <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:

> Should we socialise the benefits with the wider community? Can we call out
> "why use Ning instead of..."
> People use tools that solve problems or add value. Maybe they don't
> understand the value Ning has?
> Just sayin.
>
> Eoin Keary
> Owasp Global Board
> +353 87 977 2988
>
>
> On 7 Apr 2014, at 21:46, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>
> Just so we're all clear, I'm not saying that Ning is the best solution
> either.  In fact, my original intent in following down this rabbit hole
> with Kate was to see if Salesforce was an acceptable replacement for Ning.
> It most clearly is not.  I know that Tom has experience with Meetup so
> maybe that's an option.  Not sure what else is out there, but it's worth
> exploring.  What I am saying is that we've already spent some time getting
> people onto the Ning platform and it's been probably the most successful
> social media platform to date (I realize that's not saying much).  If we're
> going to spend time focusing on a social media initiative, then it should
> be on something that our members will actually use.
>
> ~josh
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Sarah Baso <sarah.baso at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> Josh -
>> I am sorry if Kate demo'd more of the community interaction/social tools
>> with you and the rest of the features that I pointed out weren't the
>> subject of your conversation.
>>
>> I am fine with exploring other social media platforms - as I explained
>> this was not the primary motivator for this initiative, it was an added
>> feature that is included... which we can turn off.
>>
>>  I agree with you that this platform doesn't support social media to the
>> ideal...and we should be putting our best face forward. Maybe NING is the
>> place for that, maybe not.
>>
>> If you (or jim) or someone else want to take up an initiative to figure
>> out this piece of it, that would be great.  I am sure GK will be happy to
>> be involved in the conversation as well.
>>
>> Sarah
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> OK, now I'm really confused.  Kate spent an hour on the phone with me
>>> the other day showing me the forum features of the community portal.  She
>>> showed me how to create threads, how to post, and how she can use roles to
>>> determine who can see what.  The other stuff you mentioned is all fine and
>>> dandy, but it's not social media.  Social media is about how you interact
>>> with your customers/members.  Forums, blogs, chat, tweets, and interactive
>>> web presence.  The Salesforce Portal makes a rather lame attempt at many of
>>> these and that was the functionality that Kate was demonstrating for me.
>>> Not to force the staff to backtrack, but I'd suggest that we reconsider
>>> what portion of Salesforce we are using for what things.  By all means use
>>> it for event management, member management, fundraising, recognition, etc,
>>> but please please please do not move forward with the "social media"
>>> aspects of the tool.  Frankly, they suck.  Hard.
>>>
>>> Personally, I would like to see Jim tackle social media presence as part
>>> of the website revamping efforts.  Call it OWASP 2.0 or whatever.  In my
>>> opinion, our social presence should be the front of house for OWASP (ie.
>>> get involved in the community!) with all of the bells and whistles that
>>> social media has to offer.  On the back-end we should be linking to things
>>> like projects, chapters, etc.  Salesforce should be a tool in that process,
>>> not THE tool.  Take a look at http://myowasp2.ning.com (the new 3.0
>>> platform) and you'll see what I'm talking about.  The design is extremely
>>> flexible and it pulls in aspects of our social media presence into a single
>>> location.  Can we please take this Salesforce Portal forums idea out to
>>> pasture before it kills any social media success that we've had to date?
>>> It sounds like even Sarah is saying that social media is an afterthought in
>>> this tool and is not the primary purpose.  We should always be trying to
>>> put our best face forward.  To me, this is not acceptable.
>>>
>>> ~josh
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Sarah Baso <sarah.baso at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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.org Ning 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20140407/0f9bb806/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list