[Owasp-leaders] Christian Heinrich
jim.manico at owasp.org
Wed Jul 11 22:22:54 UTC 2012
My intentions were only good here; but I understand that now is not the
best time to invite Christian back unto the leadership community at OWASP.
After speaking with the board and with Christian, I feel it's best to
table this issue for another 6 month. I have requested that Christian
demonstrate professionalism on other email lists before our next meeting
on this topic around January 13, 2013 which is a one year anniversary
from his last appeals meeting.
Brad, you are more than just an OWASP member, you are also my friend. I
understand and empathize with the perspective from you, Rex and many
others who were very frustrated from my recent email.
I still think that Christian has technical assistance to lend to the
foundation, and I want to find a way to bring him back some how if he is
willing to be respectful - very respectful - to every member of this
community, especially on public lists.
Connections Committee Chair
Cheatsheet Series Product Manager
OWASP Podcast Producer/Host
jim at owasp.org
> Aside from the fact that Christian has repeatedly trolled and attacked me
> He doesn't contribute anything at all to OWASP, and never has that I've
> been able to track down, and believe me, I looked. Especially back when I
> was working with Jason during his first episode of foolishness.
> Still, if you guys want to let him back in, I'm not going to complain. Just
> be aware, he will repeat his shenanigans. People don't change inherent
> character definitions like that.
> Just my .02, worth what you paid for it. ;~)
> -Brad Causey
> CISSP, MCSE, C|EH, CIFI, CGSP
> "Si vis pacem, para bellum"
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Stephen Craig Evans <
> stephencraig.evans at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey Jim,
>> I haven't spoke on this forum for a long time but I agree with you.
>> "From my perspective, we had finally put this issue to rest. The guy
>> not only misbehaved in multiple ways, but any contributions he made
>> were far outweighed by the damage he caused constantly stirring the
>> pot and driving people away.
>> Do you not remember how acrimonious the leaders list was when he was a
>> participant? "
>> So what, Rex. Why do you care so much? People are human. I've flown
>> off the handle and have made a lot of people angry. Whoop-de-doo.
>> Dissension and conflict is very healthy. And "normal" people can get
>> gossipy and hung up with their own agendas.
>> OWASP is about openness, and that should include some people pissing
>> off other people. If "normal" people can't take the heat, then they
>> should get out of the kitchen.
>> On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>> We have a core set of values around allowing everyone to participate
>>> in OWASP. There are a large number of disruptive people in the
>>> community, frankly its almost par for the course.
>>> I might be in error, Rex. But I would rather err on the side of
>>> transparency and inclusivity. 2 members of the OWASP Australian
>>> community approached me and said that the closed-door nature of the
>>> board hearing was problematic, even if we have been at the "give
>>> Christian a second chance" juncture several times before.
>>> And frankly, I meant to send that email to the board only, not the 600
>>> + member leadership list. As the poet Homer said, Doh! But perhaps
>>> this is for the best...
>>> Jim Manico
>>> (808) 652-3805
>>> On Jul 3, 2012, at 1:36 PM, Rex Booth <rex.booth at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>> Why is this being brought up now?
>>>> From my perspective, we had finally put this issue to rest. The guy
>> not only misbehaved in multiple ways, but any contributions he made were
>> far outweighed by the damage he caused constantly stirring the pot and
>> driving people away.
>>>> Do you not remember how acrimonious the leaders list was when he was a
>> participant? And do you really think your time is best spent hand-holding
>> Christian and filtering his communications upon his return? That's
>> maximizing value for OWASP?
>>>> Frankly, I'm disappointed you bring this up, Jim. From my perspective,
>> the board finally took action to remove a cancer from our community, yet
>> here you are trying to orchestrate its return to soothe your pangs of
>>>> One of the requirements of leadership is the ability to make tough
>> decisions. All of us here should respect that the board (finally) did so
>> in this case and let the issue rest. OWASP is not the only security
>> community on earth - let Christian find another one to join.
>>>> On Jul 3, 2012, at 3:21 AM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>> Can we give Christian Heinrich one more chance?
>>>>> The way his suspension went down was fishy in a few different aspects,
>>>>> and I am constantly haunted my our mission statement "everyone is free
>>>>> to participate".
>>>>> Christian has assured me that he will behave properly in the future.
>>>>> When I researched the issues that led to his getting suspend, I think
>>>>> he really was attacked in many ways (even though his response to this
>>>>> was unacceptable).
>>>>> 3 times is the charm. Can we give him one more chance?
>>>>> If so, I will work with him personally to help him communicate better
>>>>> with the community.
>>>>> Thanks all,
>>>>> Jim Manico
>>>>> VP, Security Architecture
>>>>> WhiteHat Security
>>>>> (808) 652-3805
>>>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>>>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
More information about the OWASP-Leaders