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

Dale Castle dale.castle at owasp.org
Fri Apr 13 14:31:36 UTC 2012


I am in the process of rebooting my chapter and find it frustrating to see
many outdated projects. I agree that we need to focus on critical projects
like OWASP top ten and those directly supporting that effort and archive
others. I pledge 25% of my chapter funding to this effort.

Dale
Charlottesville Chapter Leader

On Friday, April 13, 2012, Eoin wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The wiki page is here:
> https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Projects_Reboot_2012
>
> I think we have debated this enough, written blogs and had phone
> conversations.
> I hope for the board to ratify, or not the proposal today.
>
>
> Eoin
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 13 April 2012 11:10, John Wilander <john.wilander at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>  I would prefer a referendum among leaders preceded by both sides
> presenting their side of the matter on a wiki tab each. We would also need
> a info page what is actually proposed. "Pay" is too vague. This is an
> important question for the foundation. If a majority of leaders vote the
> community will have a much easier time accepting the outcome than if the
> board decides.
>
> If the board doesn't want a referendum I assume you will not take part in
> the discussion nor the vote, Eoin, since it's your proposal.
>
>    Regards, John
>
> --
> My music http://www.johnwilander.com
> Twitter https://twitter.com/johnwilander
> CV or Résumé http://johnwilander.se
>
> 13 apr 2012 kl. 11:33 skrev Eoin <eoin.keary at owasp.org>:
>
>    Im afraid that is not true.....
> The 2008 summer of code, leaders were paid.
> Great projects were delivered.... check the wiki.
>
> Can we let the board decide this matter? It is what the board is for.
>
> On 12 April 2012 16:05, Dennis Groves <dennis.groves at owasp.org> wrote:
>
> 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> wro
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20120413/c1e7f501/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list