[Owasp-board] Ning Renewal

Josh Sokol josh.sokol at owasp.org
Thu May 8 21:41:35 UTC 2014


OK, it sounds like the majority of the Board has voiced in favor of
renewing so I'm going to go ahead and renew via my card and request
reimbursement.  I'll issue a virtual account number so they can't
auto-charge the renewal.  It's the only reason why they haven't already hit
my card for it.  If we're asking chapters to put in for it, that seems like
a message that should come from the staff, not a Board member, IMHO.

~josh


On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Tobias <tobias.gondrom at owasp.org> wrote:

>  Hi Josh,
>
> actually we can just pay it as an org now, but still continue with Tom's
> idea of asking some chapters to spend a few of their bucks on it. As he
> said is nice as an awareness tool to make chapters aware and use what we
> have.
> (and if we don't get any donations from the chapters, we have paid it
> anyway for this year and can get feedback on whether chapters find it
> useful for next year's renewal.)
>
> Cheers, Tobias
>
>
>
>
> On 08/05/14 21:55, Josh Sokol wrote:
>
>  Tom, I love the idea.  Unfortunately, they've already sent me a second
> notice that they haven't been able to charge my card and are threatening to
> turn it off.  I'd like to push forward with the renewal so as not to drop
> the community and hopefully by the time this rolls around again we will
> have a formal strategy on our social media presence.
>
>  ~josh
>
>
> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Tom Brennan - proactiveRISK <
> tomb at proactiverisk.com> wrote:
>
>>  Win win here is pass the hat.
>>
>>  Call out to chapters to make them aware of it and it in ise for 2+
>> years.  Then ask them to pledge to get to the $600 for renewal.
>>
>>  Owasp foundation match 1:1 hence let's raise awareness as another
>> social platform, remind chapters about it.. If people want to support it
>> win win.
>>
>>  If you can't raise $300 from chapters holding 200k in its bucket the
>> community has spoken IMHO. I suspect you'll get it + it's a awareness
>> message/reminder
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Tom Brennan | 973-298-1160 x799 <973-298-1160%20x799> |
>> tomb at proactiverisk.com
>>
>>
>> On May 8, 2014, at 4:26 PM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>   It actually very much is an organization-wide platform, or at least
>> was designed to be when we moved from the free account that OWASP Austin
>> was using to the paid account that the OWASP Foundation is using.  Out of
>> the 300+ people signed up to use it, I'd guess that somewhere around 10% of
>> that is from OWASP Austin.
>>
>>  ~josh
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 3:23 PM, GK Southwick <
>> genevieve.southwick at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm going to agree with Tom on this. I feel that it should come out of
>>> the budget of the chapters that are using it. It's not an
>>> organizational-wide platform. It should not come out of the Foundation
>>> budget.
>>>
>>>  -= GK
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Tom Brennan - proactiveRISK <
>>> tomb at proactiverisk.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  A call to chapters to pay for it is appropriate especially those
>>>> using it IMHO.
>>>>
>>>>  $600 is petty cash so I'm good with either frankly
>>>>
>>>>  As example the chapters using meet-up pay for it themselves from
>>>> chapter bucket and there are 4400 people using that platform
>>>> http://owasp.meetup.com
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Tom Brennan | 973-298-1160 x799 <973-298-1160%20x799> |
>>>> tomb at proactiverisk.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 8, 2014, at 12:57 PM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  +1 :)
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jim Manico
>>>> @Manicode
>>>> (808) 652-3805 <%28808%29%20652-3805>
>>>>
>>>> On May 8, 2014, at 11:19 AM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Board,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  The Ning group is up for renewal (technically past due at this
>>>> point).  Considering that we still have a decent number of people on the
>>>> platform, and it is being actively used, I think that we should renew it
>>>> for another year with the caveat that we may end up replacing it based on a
>>>> future evaluation of social media technologies.  It's $600 for the renewal.
>>>>  We don't have a lot of time to debate this so I'd like to ask for your
>>>> permission to renew for another year.  Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  ~josh
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> WARNING: E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or
>>>> error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed,
>>>> arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does
>>>> not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this
>>>> message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. No employee
>>>> or agent is authorized to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of
>>>> proactiveRISK with another party by email.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Owasp-board mailing list
>>>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   --
>>>  Community Manager
>>>  OWASP Foundation
>>>
>>>  Phone: +01.415.742.2342
>>> Email: gksouthwick at owasp.org <gk at owasp.org>
>>> Twitter: @gksouthwick
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Owasp-board mailing list
>>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>>
>>>
>>
>> WARNING: E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or
>> error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed,
>> arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does
>> not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this
>> message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. No employee or
>> agent is authorized to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of
>> proactiveRISK with another party by email.
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140508/ecdd8484/attachment.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list