[Owasp-board] Fwd: Reinstate my OWASP membership

Tobias tobias.gondrom at owasp.org
Thu Jan 9 23:21:55 UTC 2014


I like to invite you to read the published policy for this case:
"A revoked member will not be allowed to reapply for membership for a
period not less than 24 months. The revoked member has the option to
then reapply for membership with reinstatement pending approval by the

To my understanding, we have received your request for reinstatement and
the board will vote on your reinstatement as outlined in our policies in
due course.

For this vote, the new board members need to form an opinion. And for
this, we need to evaluate any points of concern. If you request
reinstatement, we will go through this process to the best of our
abilities and with due care.

Best regards, Tobias

On 09/01/14 22:58, Jim Manico wrote:
> Christian,
> You told me via Skype that you were intentionally trying to harm and
> disrupt OWASP. I am sure you will deny this and I may have misunderstood
> the intent of your statement.
> But for certain I think an inquiry is in order. The board needs to vote
> your membership back in, per my understanding. I feel Josh is objective
> and I will take his advice seriously. I know I am not at this point.
> Aloha,
> Jim
>> Josh,
>> I did not ask for to attract the attention of a temporary committee or
>> for you to "solicit other members of our leadership" and draw further
>> negative attention towards me.
>> I haven't been a member since 9 January 2012 so how is my behaviour in
>> scope now?  Neither was this a condition of termination.
>> For the record, when I have strictly adhered to the OWASP Board
>> demands they have continued to show me disrespect and indicate that I
>> am not welcome to rejoin the community i.e.
>> http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-pci-project/2011-November/000225.html
>> Of note is that Eoin wasn't suspended for his intolerable behaviour
>> with his false accusation that I am "empty vessels trying to take
>> advantage" of OWASP i.e.
>> https://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/2010-July/003295.html
>> which was proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be completely false and
>> therefore smear and neither was Tom Brennan for refusing to release
>> the "open" content of the OWASP PCI Project, which was simply
>> promotion for WhiteHat and now Trustwave.
>> The termination action has concluded as of 9 January and the OWASP
>> Board is to reinstate my membership today (which is now the 10 January
>> and therefore a day late).
>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 5:16 AM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>>> While I agree that it is a rather sensitive matter, it seems that much of
>>> what we would be discussing took place over public mailing lists so most of
>>> this is already out in the open.  And as long as Christian does not object
>>> to it, I think we need to be as transparent throughout this process as
>>> possible and not hide in the shadows of sensitivity.  Not following the "O"
>>> in "OWASP" has bit us many times in the past and in a situation like this
>>> where claims have been made around character assassination, I feel quite
>>> strongly that all of these discussions should take place on record.
>>> Also, our intent here should not be to judge Christian for past
>>> transgressions for which he has already served a considerable amount of
>>> time.  That chapter needs to be laid to rest.  His membership was revoked on
>>> 1/9/2012 and we need to evaluate his conduct since that time and his desire
>>> and ability to positively participate in the OWASP community once again.
>>> Provided that the Board approves my proposal for a temporary committee on
>>> this matter, I will solicit other members of our leadership to participate
>>> as well.  These would be individuals agreed upon as "unbiased" by both
>>> Christian and the Board.  Christian was a well-respected and contributing
>>> member of our community before this occurred and we should at least be
>>> ensuring that his concerns are being heard.
>>> ~josh
>>> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Tobias <tobias.gondrom at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>> Josh and board colleagues,
>>>> I am happy to support you on this. Though I would like for you to take the
>>>> lead on this with me assisting, as I have only so many cycles and already
>>>> quite a bit on my plate at this moment.
>>>> One note: this is a sensitive matter and touches personal information of
>>>> individuals. Out of respect for all people involved, we should not discuss
>>>> personal details on a public mailing-list (aka the board mailing-list).
>>>> Tobias
>>>> On 09/01/14 17:26, Josh Sokol wrote:
>>>> Apparenlty there's something weird going on with the mailing list so I'm
>>>> adding Fabio as well.  He was left off of Christian's initial e-mail.  Not
>>>> sure if he's ever had any contact with this situation or if he'd want to
>>>> participate, but he may be a good person on the proposed committee as well.
>>>> ~josh
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org>
>>>> Date: Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 11:16 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: Reinstate my OWASP membership
>>>> To: Christian Heinrich <christian.heinrich at cmlh.id.au>
>>>> Cc: Sarah Baso <sarah.baso at owasp.org>, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org>,
>>>> OWASP Foundation Board List <owasp-board at lists.owasp.org>, Kate Hartmann
>>>> <kate.hartmann at owasp.org>, Michael Coates <michael.coates at owasp.org>, Tom
>>>> Brennan <tomb at owasp.org>, Eoin Keary <eoin.keary at owasp.org>, Tobias Gondrom
>>>> <tobias.gondrom at owasp.org>
>>>> Board,
>>>> I realize that this is a sensitive topic and one that has caused much
>>>> controversy in the past.  Since much has changed since then, I would very
>>>> much like to consider Christian's request to once again participate in the
>>>> OWASP community.  That said, it seems that a number of Board members may
>>>> have biases here that would likely affect their voting on this matter.  As
>>>> such, I would like to propose a temporary committee lead by myself and
>>>> Tobias based on our lack of biases on this matter with participation from
>>>> Sarah, as Executive Director, to evaluate Christian's request.  The goal of
>>>> this would not be to pass judgement on any past transgressions for which he
>>>> has already served his time, but rather, to evaluate any actions after the
>>>> vote of revocation and work with Christian to determine whether he feels
>>>> that he is willing and able to move on from this and be productive within
>>>> the OWASP Foundation.  I realize that this is a rather unusual request, but
>>>> given the passions that have flared from both sides, this seems like the
>>>> best path toward resolution.  Thank you for your consideration.
>>>> ~josh
>>>> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Christian Heinrich
>>>> <christian.heinrich at cmlh.id.au> wrote:
>>>>> Sarah,
>>>>> It is 9 January 2014 which is two years to the day
>>>>> https://www.owasp.org/index.php/January_9,_2012 which I believe has
>>>>> been proven beyond a reasonable doubt actioned without due process.
>>>>> Can you please reinstate my @owasp.org e-mail address and associated
>>>>> Honorary Membership today?
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Christian Heinrich
>>>>> <christian.heinrich at cmlh.id.au> wrote:
>>>>>> Sarah,
>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Sarah Baso <sarah.baso at owasp.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I have no further comments or response on this matter.
>>>>>> The statement above indicates that the termination action voted on by
>>>>>> the OWASP Board was retrospectively applied due to their bias and
>>>>>> without due process.
>>>>>> Nevertheless, with two years from
>>>>>> https://www.owasp.org/index.php/January_9,_2012 approaching in
>>>>>> approximately one month can you please instruct the appropriate
>>>>>> contact(s) within the OWASP Foundation to have my @owasp.org e-mail
>>>>>> address and associated Honorary Membership fully restored by 9 January
>>>>>> 2014 please?
>>>>> --
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Christian Heinrich
>>>>> http://cmlh.id.au/contact

More information about the Owasp-board mailing list