[Owasp-leaders] Membership funds

Samantha Groves samantha.groves at owasp.org
Thu Jun 6 19:06:16 UTC 2013


Yes, agree with Sarah. I recommend donating directly to a project, if you
wish to use these funds to move your project forward. It makes the
allocation of the funds much easier to manage, than say, donating it to a
chapter only to use it for a project instead.

I hope this helps, Johanna.

SG


On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Sarah Baso <sarah.baso at owasp.org> wrote:

> Johanna -
> Yes you can donate funds earmarked for a project and yes, generally the
> project leader is responsible for managing those funds although Samantha,
> as the OWASP Project Manager, will also be able to assist with this.
>
> Regards,
> Sarah Baso
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 11:47 AM, johanna curiel curiel <
> johanna.curiel at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Sarah
>>
>> Regarding sponsoring of projects, can I just submit funds to a project?
>> The project leader will be responsible for managing those funds I assume?
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Johanna
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Lucas Ferreira <lucas.ferreira at owasp.org
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Sarah,
>>>
>>> here are my ideas on funding:
>>>
>>> 1. Instead of simply removing the split, there should be a time limit to
>>> spend the funds. As an example, funds not used for more than a year would
>>> be made available to projects, other chapters or the foundation. I think
>>> there was a proposal like this from the Chapter's committee.
>>>
>>> 2. we need to have better ways of funding projects, not only chapters.
>>> Projects need to get the same level of support as chapters.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Lucas
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Sarah Baso <sarah.baso at owasp.org>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Eoin (and others) -
>>>>
>>>> I have tried to capture some of the comments received on the board list
>>>> about this below to get the conversation up to speed. Thanks to everyone
>>>> for your constructive input so far (and sorry in advance if I missed anyone.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Eoin Keary *
>>>> Maybe richer chapters get a sliding scale %
>>>> This will encourage the dormant funds to be used.
>>>> *
>>>> *
>>>> *
>>>> *
>>>> *Tom Brennan*
>>>> Many of the board members are or have been chapter leaders so leading
>>>> by example is important here.  Many staff have no concept of what it takes
>>>> to run a chapter+ this is the purpose of the board list discussion.. Hence
>>>> discuss + talk on the monthly call
>>>>
>>>>  Today there is a split on memberships BOTH individual and corporate
>>>>
>>>> 60/40 Split
>>>>
>>>> $50=$20 per chapter
>>>> $5000=$2000 per chapter
>>>>
>>>> So from the chapters perspective you have two options
>>>>
>>>>  1. Enable local chapters to set there own local membership fee and
>>>> non-profit incorporate status
>>>>
>>>> 2. Change the global percentage 40/60 25/75 or other
>>>>
>>>> Either way the chapters are the local face of owasp in the community
>>>> and that needs to rewarded and highlighted.  "Elimination" was a poor
>>>> choice but clearly has gotten the attention look forward to the board call
>>>>
>>>> Chapters can pack up and become joes InfoSec club but that's not what
>>>> is in the best interest of the community. But this does and will happen
>>>> with to much micromanagement and those interested in robinhood asset
>>>> seizure ;) a balance is needed - starts with a telephone call to the
>>>> chapter to say SPEND IT on the mission <insert spend guidelines>
>>>> *
>>>> *
>>>> *
>>>> *
>>>> *
>>>> *
>>>> *Eoin Keary*
>>>> I am also against "Eliminate Foundation/Chapter or Project Split on
>>>> Individual Memberships".
>>>>
>>>> *Seba Deleersnyder*
>>>>
>>>> I am against the proposed "Eliminate Foundation/Chapter or Project
>>>> Split on Individual Memberships".
>>>> For 2 reasons:
>>>> 1) chapter are our "feet on the street" and main drivers to push
>>>> individual membership, the current split is a great incentive for the
>>>> chapters
>>>> 2) this provides much needed income for the smaller (or poorer) chapters
>>>>
>>>> I recommend rethinking on how to activate the dormant chapter budget.
>>>>
>>>>    - Focus on the chapters with a high dormant budget
>>>>    - Challenge these chapters on spending / budget plan
>>>>    - Ask if they can adopt one or more chapters or projects and donate
>>>>    some of their budget and support to these
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Andy Willingham*
>>>> I agree with the point that eliminating the split is a bad idea. If
>>>> there are chapters with large balances then it would be a good idea to talk
>>>> with them individually rather than eliminate the split. I would imagine
>>>> that many chapters have low balances and part of that is because they are
>>>> in small population areas and actually use their funds for chapter
>>>> activities. Chapters that are in a large population areas have lots of
>>>> companies to get to sponsor their meetings and don't need the money to buy
>>>> pizza or pay for a venue. They also usually have a higher percentage of
>>>> members and renewals. Don't punish all for the success of others.*
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Josh Sokol*
>>>>
>>>>    - Proposed policy to eliminate individual membership split - 100%
>>>>    to Foundation. * *This needs details fleshed out and discussion,
>>>>    but is a starting point to raise awareness into the large amount of money
>>>>    that is sitting in the chapters and project funds (over $260,000 USD).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Seriously, WTF?  Who do you think is out there pimping memberships to
>>>> begin with?  Looking at the current memberships, the Austin Chapter holds
>>>> more membership than any other chapter other than NYC.  Know why?  Because
>>>> we require them for LASCON attendance in order to 1) Add something of value
>>>> to becoming an OWASP member and 2) raise funds for the chapter.  If you
>>>> eliminate the chapter split, then you eliminate all incentive for a chapter
>>>> to promote membership.  This isn't raising awareness about money that is
>>>> sitting dormant.  This is taking away one of the very few methods that
>>>> chapters have to raise money.  Those funds are pretty piddly for the
>>>> chapters that are the problem here, but are huge for the ones that have
>>>> next to nothing in the bank.  If you have an issue with the way (or lack
>>>> of) chapters are spending their money, then why not just take it up with
>>>> the chapters that you take issue with?  If those funds are lying dormant,
>>>> then ask the leaders what they plan on doing with the money.  Make them
>>>> provide a budget.  Don't punish the chapters who have nothing because of a
>>>> few that aren't spending what they have.
>>>>
>>>> Above you say that there's over $260k that is "sitting", but according
>>>> to the Scoreboard there's less than $230k total between both Chapters and
>>>> projects:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://docs.google.com/a/owasp.org/spreadsheet/pub?hl=en_US&hl=en_US&key=0Atu4kyR3ljftdEdQWTczbUxoMUFnWmlTODZ2ZFZvaXc&output=html
>>>>
>>>> To give you another perspective on this, out of 196 chapters and
>>>> projects, only 41 (21%) have a balance above $1k.  Only 13 (7%) have a
>>>> balance above $5k.  And only 5 (3%) have a balance above $10k.  The ones
>>>> with the money don't have it due to memberships.  They have it because they
>>>> either ran a conference or found sponsors.  Wanna know who gets affected by
>>>> this proposal?  Pakistan, Paraiba, Kuwait, Florianopolis,
>>>> Curitiba, St. Louis, Campinas, Mexico City, Goiania, Ypisilanti, and
>>>> the list goes on.  These are areas where the chapter leaders are already
>>>> struggling and now you're eliminating what little resources they have.
>>>>
>>>> I continue to be concerned by the way that the Board views the
>>>> chapters.  They are the lifeblood of this organization.  They are our
>>>> ability to reach out to areas we couldn't otherwise touch.  They are our
>>>> future volunteers.  They host our sponsors.  They run the conferences that
>>>> generate money for OWASP to run.  It's not easy to run a chapter and it's
>>>> often a completely thankless job.  Please don't make the lives of these
>>>> chapter leaders even more difficult by taking away their already limited
>>>> funding sources.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Sarah Baso
>>>>  --
>>>> Executive Director
>>>> OWASP Foundation
>>>>
>>>> sarah.baso at owasp.org
>>>> +1.312.869.2779
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Eoin <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello leaders,
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a foundation proposal to remove the split 60/40 from the
>>>>> individual membership dues. 100% if the funding goes to the foundation.
>>>>> The funds are to be used to hire additional staff but also what
>>>>> prompts this is the lack of spending.....
>>>>>
>>>>> Chapters simply are not spending their funds and we have 0000's
>>>>> building up in owasp bank accounts, all ring fenced and going nowhere!!
>>>>>
>>>>> Please share your thoughts with myself and the board.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Eoin Keary
>>>>> Owasp Global Board
>>>>> +353 87 977 2988
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>>>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Homo sapiens non urinat in ventum.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Executive Director
> OWASP Foundation
>
> sarah.baso at owasp.org
> +1.312.869.2779
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>
>


-- 

*Samantha Groves, MBA*****

*OWASP Projects Manager*

*
*

The OWASP Foundation

Arizona, USA

Email: samantha.groves at owasp.org

Skype: samanthahz


OWASP Global Projects<https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Category:OWASP_Project>

Book a Meeting with Me <http://goo.gl/mZXdZ>

OWASP Contact US Form <http://owasp4.owasp.org/contactus.html>

New Project Application
Form<https://docs.google.com/a/owasp.org/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dHZfWGhHZ0Z4UFFwZU42djBXcVVLSlE6MQ#gid=0>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20130606/b0203281/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list