[Owasp-board] Motion to approve proposal 3

Josh Sokol josh.sokol at owasp.org
Sun Oct 11 17:08:56 UTC 2015


I agree 100%.  Is that something that you can work on updating for us,
Noreen?  It sounds like you have a well thought out process already.  It
just needs to be documented in the proper place.  Thank you!

~josh

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Noreen Whysel <noreen.whysel at owasp.org>
wrote:

> Regarding this proposal, there will need to be a corresponding definition
> of active in the handbooks. Right now there is only an implied definition
> that an active chapter is one that fulfills minimum requirements. This is
> not stated explicitly. There is a line in Chapter 2 that say is at least 4
> chapter meetings per year is "recommended" to be considered active.
>
> In my audits, the decision to inactivate a chapter is discretionary, not
> prescriptive: Preceding the decision to mark a chapter as inactive, I look
> to see if minimum requirements have been met. If not, is there a responsive
> chapter leader or intention and action on the part of a chapter leader to
> meet requirements? I give a week to reply to my inquiries to judge whether
> the leader is responsive, and if they request it, a one month grace period
> to get evidence of activity on the chapter page, after which I will mark
> them active. (In practice it takes longer. There are a lot of open
> inquiries at the moment).
>
> The handbooks will need to have a definition of active to give meaning to
> this proposals.
>
> Noreen Whysel
> Community Manager
> OWASP Foundation
>
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> 1YES 2YES 3YES 4(YES)
>> 5YES 6YES 7YES more?
>> 8YES 9YES 10YES almost there...
>> 11YES
>>
>> Let's get these funds moving and serving the mission.
>>
>> Aloha,
>> Jim
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/9/15 10:22 PM, Josh Sokol wrote:
>>
>> My vote: Yes
>>
>> Votes (please update when you reply all with your vote)
>> Andrew: Yes
>> Michael: Yes
>> Jim: *
>> Josh: Yes
>> Fabio:
>> Matt:
>> Tobias: Yes
>>
>> * Assuming they vote yes since they proposed and seconded
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Tobias <tobias.gondrom at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes. (Tobias)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 09/10/15 18:16, Michael Coates wrote:
>>>
>>> My vote: Yes
>>>
>>>
>>> Votes (please update when you reply all with your vote)
>>> Andrew: Yes
>>> Michael: Yes
>>> Jim: *
>>> Josh: *
>>> Fabio:
>>> Matt:
>>> Tobias:
>>>
>>> * Assuming they vote yes since they proposed and seconded
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael Coates | @_mwc
>>> <https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=_mwc>
>>> OWASP Global Board
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:53 AM, Andrew van der Stock <
>>> <vanderaj at owasp.org>vanderaj at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I e-vote yes to this amended proposal.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Jim Manico < <jim.manico at owasp.org>
>>>> jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Seconded
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jim Manico
>>>>> Global Board Member
>>>>> OWASP Foundation
>>>>> <https://www.owasp.org/>https://www.owasp.org
>>>>> Join me at AppSecUSA <http://appsecusa.org/> 2015!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 9, 2015, at 2:57 AM, Josh Sokol < <josh.sokol at owasp.org>
>>>>> josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I made a change to clarify the definition of "active" as it relates to
>>>>> chapters and projects upon Tobias' request, but the idea is still the
>>>>> same.  I would like to motion that we approve proposal 3 of the funding
>>>>> initiative discussed at the last Board meeting.  The exact wording is as
>>>>> follows:
>>>>>
>>>>> *All accounts belonging to active chapters and projects, as defined in
>>>>> the Chapter and Project Handbooks respectively, with balances less than
>>>>> $500, will be brought to $500 beginning January 1, 2016 as long as there
>>>>> are at least two active leaders at that time.*
>>>>>
>>>>> Do I hear a second?
>>>>>
>>>>> ~josh
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Owasp-board mailing list
>>>>> <Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org>Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>>>> <https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board>
>>>>> 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 listOwasp-board at lists.owasp.orghttps://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim Manico
>> Global Board Member
>> OWASP Foundationhttps://www.owasp.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20151011/8e5913fb/attachment.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list