[Owasp-board] Motion to approve proposal 3

Tobias tobias.gondrom at owasp.org
Sun Oct 11 21:55:51 UTC 2015


Hi Noreen,

thank you very much for pointing that out.
Could you prepare a description for what would be a definition you think 
makes sense, for next Wednesday?

@Josh: I think we (our operations team and possibly us) need to be clear 
on that answer for this proposal to work properly. Otherwise, we will 
make it ambiguous/unclear and hard  to implement for our team.

Best, Tobias


On 11/10/15 19:08, Josh Sokol wrote:
> 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 <mailto: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
>     <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:jim.manico at owasp.org>>
>>>                 wrote:
>>>
>>>                     Seconded
>>>
>>>                     --
>>>                     Jim Manico
>>>                     Global Board Member
>>>                     OWASP Foundation
>>>                     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
>>>                     <mailto: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
>>>>                     <mailto:Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org>
>>>>                     https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>>
>>>                     _______________________________________________
>>>                     Owasp-board mailing list
>>>                     Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>>                     <mailto:Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org>
>>>                     https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                 _______________________________________________
>>>                 Owasp-board mailing list
>>>                 Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>>                 <mailto:Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org>
>>>                 https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>             _______________________________________________
>>>             Owasp-board mailing list
>>>             Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org  <mailto:Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org>
>>>             https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>
>>
>>             _______________________________________________
>>             Owasp-board mailing list
>>             Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>             <mailto:Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org>
>>             https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Owasp-board mailing list
>>         Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org  <mailto: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 <mailto: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/20151011/58a2c1fb/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list