[Owasp-board] Public Statements, Personal Thoughts, The Voice of OWASP

Dennis Groves dennis.groves at owasp.org
Wed Feb 5 22:48:38 UTC 2014


Legally, Sarah has the right to speak on behalf of OWASP.


On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Eoin Keary <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:

> So who has the authority to speak for OWASP? I was voted in (twice) as a
> board member to represent my voters.
>
> Shall we set up a censorship panel? A politically correctness project such
> that we don't offend commercial interests or should we lead by example,
> stand up and be counted?
>
>
>
> Eoin Keary
> Owasp Global Board
> +353 87 977 2988
>
>
> On 5 Feb 2014, at 21:46, Michael Coates <michael.coates at owasp.org> wrote:
>
> So, Josh did provide an example, but this thread was not intended to focus
> on any one situation. There's actually a few different ones we could look
> it (including me) and instead I just wanted to cover the overall idea. Goal
> is to be aware of potential situations so we can keep doing awesome things
> effectively.
>
>
> --
> Michael Coates
> @_mwc
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure I'd necessarily frame it as "crossing the line", but your
>> tweets regarding cancelling the RSA training were definitely regarded as
>> actions by "OWASP" and not "Eoin" in the media that covered it.  Not that
>> you should have to ask for permission to cancel a training, but when you're
>> doing it as an OWASP training, then the cancellation should have been an
>> OWASP message.  What if we had decided to fill your slot with another
>> trainer?  Much of the damage would have already been done.  I think that
>> the point that Michael is trying to make here is that we are viewed as the
>> OWASP Board and statements by one of us can certainly affect the others and
>> the Foundation.  Nobody is asking for you to seek permission, but rather,
>> to consider the consequences as they relate to more than just yourself.
>>
>> ~josh
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Eoin Keary <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> If someone asks me my opinion as an OWASP leader I am not prepared to
>>> ask for permission. I've been with OWASP for 10 years and never crossed the
>>> line.
>>>
>>> Eoin Keary
>>> Owasp Global Board
>>> +353 87 977 2988
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5 Feb 2014, at 19:14, Michael Coates <michael.coates at owasp.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Board,
>>> >
>>> > I'd like to bring up a topic for thought. As board members we
>>> individually have very little power. Hence the entire process of a vote for
>>> decisions and the rule of majority.
>>> >
>>> > In addition, we also each wear a variety of hats - our professional
>>> "day job" our "owasp hat", our own ideas separate from each, etc.
>>> >
>>> > I mention these items for the following scenarios:
>>> > 1. We need to be careful about acting as individuals and issuing
>>> statements on behalf of OWASP. I believe an official channel for OWASP
>>> statements is much more clear for the community and the world rather then
>>> individual statements by board members on blogs, twitter, interviews, etc.
>>> >
>>> > 2. Currently our owasp blog serves a variety of purposes. Whether or
>>> not we intend, any post made here will also be interpreted as an official
>>> statement by OWASP. Food for thought - there are multiple people that can
>>> post to this blog. If we hastily issue a post here it could be picked up as
>>> an official statement by OWASP before we have a chance to fully flush out
>>> the wording or message.
>>> >
>>> > 3. Our mailing lists are all publicly archived. This is great and by
>>> design. Keep in mind that your statements will be referenced within
>>> stories, future discussions, etc. We should do our best to keep on topic
>>> within subject threads, change subject lines when conversation drifts, and
>>> be cognizant that emails sent in haste will live on forever.
>>> >
>>> > I'm interested in others thoughts on this. Building clear official
>>> channels for OWASP statements will make our messages more powerful and
>>> easier for others to spread.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Michael Coates
>>> > @_mwc
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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
>
>


-- 
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
software.<http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot/statement>
Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents.
Send OpenDocument <http://fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument/> instead!

<http://www.owasp.org/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20140205/be6ca106/attachment.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list