[Owasp-leaders] Why it's ok to pay leaders

Dennis Groves dennis.groves at owasp.org
Thu Apr 12 15:05:24 UTC 2012


Its not open to all, OWASP leaders must not be paid by OWASP. Did you not
read Dinis's message? You seem to fail to understand that OWASP has been
down this route of paying its leaders at least twice and it failed both
times.

Once you go down that route you destroy OWASP's meritocracy and cease to be
the an open social organization.

You create a corporation; and corporations are closed not open. You don't
for example share openly the salaries of all the different paid employees
with each other. Why? Did you watch the TED talk about morality in animals?
Even monkeys refuse to work under such conditions. So, you must start
closing OWASP. This is no longer OWASP its CWASP.

You are right this shouldn't need to be up for discussion, but clearly some
of members still fail to understand that this is the very fabric of OWASP
and that we not only is paying OWASP leaders verboten; it is tantamount
destroying OWASP, and I know you are not advocating this! :-)

*I have choose just a single problem,that would result - Dinis has
identified over 15 in his email that would require resolutions to make it
work*




-- 
Dennis Groves <http://about.me/dennis.groves>, MSc
dennis.groves at owasp.org

 <http://www.owasp.org/>

*This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of
this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ or
send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain
View, California, 94041, USA.*



On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 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.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ken van Wyk
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20120412/bf274ba4/attachment.html>


More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list