[Owasp-board] Timing of Board meeting agenda items

Paul Ritchie paul.ritchie at owasp.org
Fri Oct 16 22:15:40 UTC 2015

Hello Tobias, Andrew, Board:
I also will take some responsibility for our extended discussions on the
funding proposals.  Many could have been called to vote earlier.

However, I am encouraged by the increased discussion and wanted to ensure
all had their say.
Frankly the proposals seem straightforward, but they do have strategic and
cultural impact on the community and I wanted to see that fully discussed.

Our smaller chapters are now given an incentive with this funding to 'be
active', and share leadership with a 2nd leader'.
Our larger chapters are now engaged in the budget/planning process, AND
encouraged to put those chapter funds to work 'for owasp'.

Proposal 6 is a good way to stimulate activity by saying "look what other
Chapters & Projects have done, you can do that too!"

my 2 cents.  Paul

Best Regards, Paul Ritchie
OWASP Executive Director
paul.ritchie at owasp.org

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Tobias <tobias.gondrom at owasp.org> wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
> you are right and I apologise.
> I take your complaint to heart.
> And I am very sorry that I did not manage time and agenda more properly.
> Going forward we need to agree on the agenda more carefully and then
> follow it with better time keeping.
> We have spend a large amount of time on discussion of only one set of
> proposals while you waited patiently to proceed to items that technically
> were brought up even earlier than others that took up our time. Going
> forward, I think we need to consider two things: 1. to assign duration and
> enforce this, and 2. possibly add an additional board meeting or extend the
> time (starting earlier or extend until later) to clean up our backlog.
> As for confidential elements, there is email or we can call for another
> board meeting for a specific item.
> Please let me know what you prefer.
> Again my apologies for not enforcing our time line more strictly.
> Going forward please also do not hesitate to remind us at any time if we
> deviate from the agenda or at the beginning, if the proposed agenda is not
> set appropriately and we risk not reaching points that are more important.
> Best, Tobias
> On 15/10/15 03:43, Andrew van der Stock wrote:
>> Hi Tobias,
>> I really was frustrated again today that one agenda item took up nearly
>> the entire hour. We really need to work on being fair to all agenda items
>> by being more forceful on timing, or we need to extend Board meetings to
>> cope with the lesser number of items we can realistically push through in
>> an hour.
>> I am sick of items that are super important getting a couple of minutes
>> at the end or pushed again and again. It's simply not productive. I've got
>> the Bylaws discussion coming up in November, and we didn't even get through
>> the old business from September this month.
>> The Benchmark discussion in my view merits a special board meeting before
>> November's meeting, as I really felt that it didn't get the discussion
>> during the main time of the meeting. How far did we get with the Benchmark
>> discussion after I had to leave, and are there any concrete proposals to
>> fix the general case (rather than this specific project?)
>> Additionally, if I recall correctly, Jim had a confidential item we had
>> to leave from September's meeting. Is there any method we can do to get
>> that done before November?
>> thanks
>> Andrew
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20151016/4f740e9c/attachment.html>

More information about the Owasp-board mailing list