[Owasp-board] Motion to approve proposal 3

Jim Manico jim.manico at owasp.org
Sun Oct 11 21:09:33 UTC 2015


Noreen,

Even if the definition of active chapter is "fluid", are you ok with "active chapter" being a few guidelines but at your discretion? The more we empower staff the better in my opinion...

Aloha, 
--
Jim Manico
Global Board Member
OWASP Foundation
https://www.owasp.org
Join me in Rome for AppSecEU 2016!

> On Oct 11, 2015, at 6:19 PM, 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
>>>>> OWASP Global Board
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:53 AM, Andrew van der Stock <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> wrote:
>>>>>>> Seconded
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jim Manico
>>>>>>> Global Board Member
>>>>>>> OWASP Foundation
>>>>>>> https://www.owasp.org
>>>>>>> Join me at AppSecUSA 2015!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 2015, at 2:57 AM, Josh Sokol <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
>>>>>>>> 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 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
>> 
>> -- 
>> Jim Manico
>> Global Board Member
>> OWASP Foundation
>> https://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/c511707c/attachment.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list