[Owasp-board] Proposal to Eliminate "At Large" Board Positions
tomb at owasp.org
Sat Oct 3 19:39:03 UTC 2015
Excellent resources available on the topic from Blue
> On Oct 1, 2015, at 3:11 PM, Tobias <tobias.gondrom at owasp.org> wrote:
> A few thoughts:
> 1. I would also very much like to see the committees be build by the community, however, at this point, I get the feeling that this is not happening. Not quite sure why. But I see this as the reality we have to accept for the time being.
> 2. for the areas, actually, I have a different view, I would be fine for the board members to be "at large". But I can see a use for certain focus points to be driven by individual board members. Btw. most boards have sub-committees (chaired by some of the board members) that focus on specific areas and develop mature proposals before they are presented to the whole board for tweaking and approval. In fact that would probably be useful for us as well as it could improve the maturity of proposal drafts coming to the board meetings. I don't mind to have a broad discussion, but in a number of cases, when 2-3 people work on refining a proposal first, that can later streamline the overall discussion in the board and with the community.
> So I rather not see these focus areas in the hand of one board member, but could see us have one board member lead a small design team for certain areas on preparing the drafts to a better quality level. IMHO that does not mean that each and every board member has to take on one area. Of course, I would strongly encourage sharing and balancing of work load on these tasks.
> My thoughts on this. Not sure that answers your question.
> Best regards, Tobias
> On 29/09/15 16:58, Josh Sokol wrote:
>> I have no issues with rebuilding the committees, but I feel that they should be built by the community, not by the Board. This is less operational and more "vision" of the organization in those areas.
>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Matt Konda <matt.konda at owasp.org <mailto:matt.konda at owasp.org>> wrote:
>> Interesting idea. I like that it emphasizes projects and chapters explicitly.
>> What would your thinking be on that versus rebuilding committees and asking all board members to be active in at least one committee?
>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org <mailto:josh.sokol at owasp.org>> wrote:
>> I wanted to make a proposal regarding the positions that are determined at the beginning of the year amongst the new Board members. The more I think about it, the more I dislike the concept of an "At Large" Board position. I get it. It's kind a catch-all for those who don't have a specific role, but I would like to change it to be more specific. I would like to propose to change the Board positions to:
>> Vice Chair
>> The idea being that these "At Large" positions are now given specific areas of focus. They are tasked with providing updates and contemplating initiatives that would provide value in those areas. We can work on a more formal write-up later, but I wanted to see what others thought about the idea.
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Owasp-board