[Owasp-board] Regarding Hackademic project-follow up discussion clarifications
johanna curiel curiel
johanna.curiel at owasp.org
Fri Jul 24 15:26:16 UTC 2015
I think I have shown enough proof and documentation on what I based my
criteria opinions. Also Timo.
Anyone that takes time to read will see. Enough documented on the mailing
Our work and mission has been to safeguard the quality and image of OWASP
through their projects. Its about *quality* and we have worked quite hard ,
me and other members, to do this and achieve a clean inventory,promote
projects that deserve visibility so when users and consumers of projects
look at them , they can find valuable and quality projects that serve the
Projects that can be downloaded and use without thinking how the hell it
works and what a crappy code. Or even worse, empty wiki pages so called
'projects'. Yes , thats what happened in the past, but not under our
watch.More than 100 empty projects and the reason why projects were
demoted we started a major clean up. The facts speak by themselves.
The discussion is about resources, quality of projects and using OWASP
money and resources based on deliverables and quality. During 2 years we
have communicated and feedback with many leaders. First time I have
encountered this kind of behaviour or reaction to our feedback and yes, we
want to call the attention of the Board regarding this issue.
Unfortunately it didn't and it went into a personal direction where I was
accused of favouritism projects and Konstantinos never responded to which
In my opinion very unprofessional and quite childish reactions when we are
trying to get some work done here.
Our message to all projects no matter who you are: Update the info and make
your project better, thats all we want, so when potential users and
sponsors look at OWASP they see quality and not empty-handed projects.
Especially when the project leaders wants to achieve a higher rank such as
LAB or flagship or obtain a good portion of resources.
Empty projects and low quality has not server the mission at all. These
kind of projects get their chance in an incubator phase, but they should
not pretend to have a quality and obtain resources that they have not
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Konstantinos Papapanagiotou <
Konstantinos at owasp.org> wrote:
> It's convenient for you to say that you talked to the leaders while you've
> never got in touch with me. Being offensive on the other hand is not a
> matter of convenience, it's about how the other person feels.
> Btw all activities are visible in github, if you take a bit of time and
> look for them.
> Again, Timo, don't get me wrong. I appreciate your comments, concerns and
> criticism. I don't like and in fact I find offensive the way this was
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Timo Goosen <timo.goosen at owasp.org>
>> >I have already answered to that. All money in the project budget come
>> from Google Summer of Code and have been spent to get students and
>> >contributors to AppSec conferences and project summits. The $4500 of the
>> code sprint have not been allocated to Hackdemic; they have been allocated
>> >directly to the students.
>> Still a waste of money if the deliverables that the students come up with
>> are not going to be added to the codebase or documentation as we've seen in
>> the past with documentation given to the leaders.
>> >Thank you for expressing your *personal* opinion on our project Timo. I
>> respect it but would have appreciated it if it was more to the point and
>> targeted to >the right people, rather than the board list.
>> >Unfortunately, the way you and especially Johanna are handling this is
>> offensive and libelous. Very much different than constructive criticism.
>> We've tried being nice and talking to the project leaders and they just
>> ignore us.
>> Its convenient for you to find the criticism offensive.
>> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Konstantinos Papapanagiotou <
>> Konstantinos at owasp.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Timo Goosen <timo.goosen at owasp.org>
>>>> We never said that the money from the code sprint come with additional
>>>> responsibilities apart those mentioned in the proposal. Who do you think
>>>> you are?
>>>> >This project is not worth the amount of money spent on it. Who do you
>>>> think you are? I'd like to see what all the money allocated to this project
>>>> has been spent on.
>>> I have already answered to that. All money in the project budget come
>>> from Google Summer of Code and have been spent to get students and
>>> contributors to AppSec conferences and project summits. The $4500 of the
>>> code sprint have not been allocated to Hackdemic; they have been allocated
>>> directly to the students.
>>>> >I've been involved with owasp for more than 10 years now, I've worked
>>>> with quite a few project leaders, Paolo and Samantha. They were all
>>>> supportive >and helped you get actual work done. You don't care to do that.
>>>> You only care to convince everyone about your point of view at any cost.
>>>> I don't see how these statements have any relevance here. The
>>>> discussion is about hackademic.
>>> Well obviously not. This looks more like a discussion around code sprint
>>> and money spending and btw burying a rather successful project to justify
>>> the means.
>>>> >Johanna, I don't want you involved in our project in any way from now
>>>> on. I was actually wrong: you re not only unproductive, but destructive. I
>>>> will >also personally refrain from volunteering in any activity you are
>>>> either leading or participating.
>>>> Well we don't want to be involved with it anymore either. This project
>>>> is a waste of time and money to me.
>>> Thank you for expressing your *personal* opinion on our project Timo. I
>>> respect it but would have appreciated it if it was more to the point and
>>> targeted to the right people, rather than the board list.
>>> Unfortunately, the way you and especially Johanna are handling this is
>>> offensive and libelous. Very much different than constructive criticism.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Owasp-board