[Owasp-leaders] Why it's ok to pay leaders
dinis.cruz at owasp.org
Thu Apr 12 14:40:40 UTC 2012
Well , I listed about 14 reasons why this is a bad idea (on an email on
this thread and also posted on my blog:
And if you don't agree with my items, could you please list the ones you
think I'm wrong, with the reasons why?
The problem is always with details, and for example, Ken what you describe
in *"...fair and equitable selection process, with appropriate checks and
balances, removal of conflicts of interest..." *is just about impossible to
do at OWASP (for example I've never seen it happen (some of the 14 items in
explain why this is impossible to do)).
And In my point of view, that inability to implement such *"...fair and
equitable selection process, with appropriate checks and balances, removal
of conflicts of interest..." *is one of OWASP's strongest assets and
Can I again remind you that we even don't have a project manager and can
manage our current projects/process/workflows (see
On 12 April 2012 15:08, Kenneth Van Wyk <ken at krvw.com> wrote:
> OK, gotta chime in. I've followed this thread, and frankly, I can't even
> imagine why it's up for discussion.
> If OWASP has money to fund a project/event/whatever, AND
> Bidding on that funded effort is open to all, AND
> There is a fair and equitable selection process, with appropriate checks
> and balances, removal of conflicts of interest, AND
> An OWASP Leader happens to be selected, THEN
> It's a win for everyone.
> OWASP gets the effort from the person(s) selected.
> The selected person(s) gets revenue for his/her efforts.
> I mean, DUH! Why aren't we all doing a face-palm over this non-issue?
> Please explain what I'm missing here.
> Ken van Wyk
> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OWASP-Leaders