[Owasp-leaders] Thank you voters!

dinis cruz dinis.cruz at owasp.org
Sat Nov 21 00:09:19 EST 2009

Just for the record, a place on the OWASP board is a 'license/mandate to
work even more crazy hours for OWASP' (says he at 5am on a Sat morning),
so it really doesn't suit people who want the position because they get the
'extra benefits' (whatever those are)

I don't think that lack of performance from Board Members is not a big issue
at the moment (If it is please raise it), but as the board grows/matures, it
is definitely something that we will need to be aware of.

Regarding the abuse of the 'OWASP Leadership brand' (i.e. people who want
the role but don't put in the effort), I am much more worried about: chapter
leaders, committee members and project leaders. This is quite a hot topic
and one that will only get worse until we get a good grip on what exactly
are the roles, responsibilities and expectations on OWASPs: Board Members,
Committee Members, Chapter & Project Leaders (hey Tom B has been trying to a
get a decent governance model for OWASP for 1 year now, and he is still not
there :)  )

The fact that we are talking about ways to game the election is already a
great evolution since last year (or even 6 months ago) Board Member
elections was not even on the agenda.


2009/11/20 McGovern, James F. (eBusiness) <James.McGovern at thehartford.com>

> Observing something that has the potential to be gamed (something I do a
> lot of in my day job) that I wouldn't want us to solve for reactively.
> If you are a vendor, why wouldn't you want to say that not only are you
> OWASP connected, but your CXO sits on the board. Being on the board of a
> non-profit sometimes benefits the individual more than the non-profit...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owasp-leaders-bounces at lists.owasp.org
> [mailto:owasp-leaders-bounces at lists.owasp.org] On Behalf Of Rex Booth
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 2:00 PM
> To: owasp-leaders at lists.owasp.org
> Cc: <owasp-leaders at lists.owasp.org>
> Subject: Re: [Owasp-leaders] Thank you voters!
> Understood.  I guess I have two thoughts.
> 1) what advantage would a company have in acquiring a seat on the board?
> And would it be such an advantage that it's worth several thousand
> dollars?  I simply don't see this happening.
> 2) I think it would be very contrary to owasp principles to grant voting
> enhanced voting rights to corporate entities.
> Is this a serious concern of yours or just an academic exercise? :)
> On Nov 20, 2009, at 1:30 PM, "McGovern, James F. (eBusiness)"
> <James.McGovern at thehartford.com  > wrote:
> ************************************************************
> This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of
> addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or privileged
> information.  If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying,
> disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited.  If you
> are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
> return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy all copies.
> ************************************************************
> _______________________________________________
> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders


Dinis Cruz

Blog: http://diniscruz.blogspot.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/DinisCruz
Web: http://www.owasp.org/index.php/O2
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20091121/2a7839f8/attachment.html 

More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list