[Owasp-board] Call for Vote: Bylaw Change to Section 3.03 Regular Meetings

Josh Sokol josh.sokol at owasp.org
Tue May 5 02:26:05 UTC 2015


Updating status of the vote:

Josh - Yes
Jim - Yes
Matt - Yes
Fabio - Yes
Michael - Yes
Tobias - Yes
Andrew -

Andrew, could you please provide your vote when you get a chance?  The vote
passes, but I would like to be able to say that all votes were counted.
Thanks!

~josh

On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Michael Coates <michael.coates at owasp.org>
wrote:

> I'm fine with this wording.
>
> Yes.
>
>
> --
> Michael Coates | @_mwc <https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=_mwc>
> OWASP Global Board
> Join me at AppSecUSA <http://AppSecUSA.org> 2015 in San Francisco!
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Paul Ritchie <paul.ritchie at owasp.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Tobias, All:
>>
>> Yes, that scenario is possible under an exact application of the rule,
>>  But I expect that under the first 'vote of confidence', the Board could
>> vote to 'accept' the explanation of the missed meetings, and included in
>> the motion to 'accept the explanation'.....add a phrase that says, 'Board
>> will conduct a second vote of confidence 'when or if' another meeting is
>> missed'.
>>
>> At least, that is one way to implement this policy.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> Best Regards, Paul Ritchie
>> OWASP Executive Director
>> paul.ritchie at owasp.org
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Tobias <tobias.gondrom at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>>  I agree and vote "yes", too.
>>>
>>> But I have one question:  maybe I am overthinking this, just got a weird
>>> thought:
>>> imagine the following scenario: Let's say a board member does not attend
>>> 4 out of the first 8 meetings. So obviously this means he/she will not
>>> fulfill her requirement and this will trigger a mandatory vote of
>>> confidence when he/she misses the 4th time at the 8th meeting. The current
>>> text seems to further mean that it will also trigger further votes of
>>> confidence for every one of the following four board meetings even if the
>>> board member attends all of them??? But maybe I am misreading or
>>> overthinking?
>>>
>>> Tobias
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 04/05/15 23:09, Josh Sokol wrote:
>>>
>>>     OK, no discussion so I'd like to call for a vote.  Looks like Jim,
>>> Matt, and Fabio have already gotten us started:
>>>
>>>  Josh - Yes
>>>  Jim - Yes
>>>  Matt - Yes
>>>  Fabio - Yes
>>>  Michael -
>>>  Tobias -
>>>  Andrew -
>>>
>>>  ~josh
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Fabio Cerullo <fcerullo at owasp.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Yes
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> On 4 May 2015, at 10:43, Matt Konda <matt.konda at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   I'm supportive of this.  (Yes to accept the language in Josh's
>>>> original email)
>>>>
>>>>  Matt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>  With a formal motion, and a second, the next step is a call for
>>>>> discussion.  I know that there was some discussion around the percent, but
>>>>> I feel comfortable with the higher number (75%), especially given that it
>>>>> includes the human component of a Board vote.  In effect, we have a process
>>>>> to determine whether they were upholding expectations, and another process
>>>>> to determine if there was a reasonable explanation as to why they were
>>>>> not.  I realize that it is already the weekend for some of you so let's
>>>>> give this until Monday 12 PM CST for any discussion around this.  Assuming
>>>>> that there is none, or that we are all in agreement, we will push for a
>>>>> Yes/No/Abstain vote on Monday.  Sound good?
>>>>>
>>>>>  ~josh
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>  So I second this motion and obviously vote yes as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Aloha,
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Jim Manico
>>>>>> @Manicode
>>>>>> (808) 652-3805 <%28808%29%20652-3805>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 1, 2015, at 5:59 AM, Paul Ritchie <paul.ritchie at owasp.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Josh - All:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  While I am not a voting member of the Board, I do support this
>>>>>> improved language for a Bylaw Change.
>>>>>> Note:  The Vote of Confidence gives the Board the flexibility to
>>>>>> 'take no action' if it is determined there were valid reasons for an
>>>>>> individual to miss a meeting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Also, best practice for email voting requires that all 7 Board
>>>>>> members response proactively (yes, no, abstain) to ensure there is
>>>>>> unanimous consent to hold the email vote.  And of course, at the next
>>>>>> normal board meeting we will note in the minutes the official result of the
>>>>>> email voting 'between' meetings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Paul
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    Best Regards, Paul Ritchie
>>>>>> OWASP Executive Director
>>>>>> paul.ritchie at owasp.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Since we didn't have time to cover this during the meeting, I
>>>>>>> would like to call for a formal vote offline for Bil's proposed Bylaw
>>>>>>> change.  I formally motion that we approve Bil's proposal as written:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *PROPOSED*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *SECTION 3.03 Regular Meetings.* The Board of Directors shall have
>>>>>>> regular meetings as needed.  A link to the board meeting agenda’s and the
>>>>>>> historical minutes is here:
>>>>>>> https://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Board_Meetings.  Meetings
>>>>>>> shall be at such dates, times, and places as the Board shall determine in
>>>>>>> December of the preceding year and as amended by the Board. In no event
>>>>>>> will there be less than one meeting per quarter.  These meetings will be
>>>>>>> open to public attendance, however, certain portions of the meeting may be
>>>>>>> closed to board members  and their delegates when required for legal
>>>>>>> reasons, or to shield liability, or to handle personnel issues, or
>>>>>>> similar.  Attendance in person or virtually by board members is required at
>>>>>>> no less than 75% of the total meetings each year and shall be highly
>>>>>>> encouraged to meet in person at least once annually at a date to be
>>>>>>> announced and agreed upon.  Attendance is tabulated after every scheduled
>>>>>>> meeting for the purpose of determining if the 75% attendance requirement
>>>>>>> has been met, and the tabulation is based upon the entire calendar year.
>>>>>>> Cancelled meetings are considered attended for the purposes of the
>>>>>>> tabulation.  Failure by a board member to meet the 75% attendance
>>>>>>> requirement after any tabulation will cause a mandatory vote of confidence
>>>>>>> by the remaining board members, whose votes will be publicly recorded.  An
>>>>>>> overall vote of "no confidence" is recorded if half or more of the board
>>>>>>> members vote for it, which causes the board member in question to be
>>>>>>> instantly removed from their seat on the board.  Vacancies on the board are
>>>>>>> handled as per Section 3.10.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2 OWASP Board of Directors will hold quarterly board meetings
>>>>>>> lasting 4­6 hours each. The schedule of meetings will be set by the board
>>>>>>> in December before the year. It is likely the the board meetings will take
>>>>>>> place on Saturdays or on a dedicated day before a large OWASP conference.
>>>>>>> This change is a result of the success of the longer format board meeting
>>>>>>> and also a result of the Executive Director role that has enabled full time
>>>>>>> involvement and focus on OWASP operations. Board members must attend (in
>>>>>>> person or virtually) 3 of the 4 meetings to fulfill the attendance
>>>>>>> requirements. This will take effect in January, 2014. Changes passed August
>>>>>>> 19, 2013.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3 “and shall be highly encouraged to meet in person at least once
>>>>>>> annually at a date to be announced and agreed upon” amendment to document
>>>>>>> passed June 10, 2013.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Do I have a second?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  ~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
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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 listOwasp-board at lists.owasp.orghttps://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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20150504/9ec25b03/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list