[Owasp-leaders] OWASP Board Election - What do you want in a board candidate?

Yvan Boily yvanboily at gmail.com
Tue Jul 15 16:36:59 UTC 2014


Thanks!  Signing up was painless, looking forward to helping out!


On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Sarah Baso <sarah.baso at owasp.org> wrote:

> All -
>
> Sorry I am just getting to this thread, as I was out yesterday for the
> latter part of the day.
>
> TLDR -
>
> 1. Kelly is in the process of following up with the candidates to see if
> they have any issues with posting their information to the wiki now instead
> of the August 19th date, which was posted to the election timeline.
>
> 2. Election committee or volunteers - awesome, if people want to step up
> and get involved/help out, this is more than welcome.  Sign up here
> <http://owasp.force.com/volunteers/GW_Volunteers__VolunteersJobListing>
>
> 3. Changing the election timeline/rules stated on the election page -
> generally, no problem to evaluate and make changes year to year.  I did not
> think it was appropriate to change mid-cycle based on a board request
> without good reason, especially since there were multiple opportunities for
> the board to comment and make adjustments before the call for candidates in
> early May.
>
> ##########
>
> I am going to back up a bit and explain some of the other background on
> this for those of you looking for more information:
>
> The board election pages, going back to 2009, have been tagged with the
> Board Election category for easy access to previous years: [[Category:Board
> Elections]] <https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Category:Board_Elections>
>
> Elections generally were overseen by the membership committee and
> increasingly since Kelly Santalucia became involved with the Foundation and
> providing support to the membership committee (before its closing), she
> provided the primary operational support driving timelines, workflow and
> communicating clear expectations about the election.  Dan Cornell has also
> been instrumental in volunteering to help with the election itself,
> liaising with simply voting.
>
> In the past, Kelly has asked for volunteer help (and there was an
> initiative for volunteers to sign up, which no one had signed up for - I
> have now reposted that initiative and anyone interested can sign up:
> http://owasp.force.com/volunteers/GW_Volunteers__VolunteersJobListing ).
>  Dan Cornell has been great about helping as needed with the actual set up
> in Simply Voting and Mark Miller has volunteered to do the candidate
> interviews this year.  Certainly , if others are willing to take on the
> policy and procedures of the election, that would be welcome.
>
> In terms of the posting/not posting of candidates immediately, up to last
> year, candidates just added their name and why me to the wiki page.  There
> seemed to be a small amount of candidates putting themselves into the
> running (especially outside of incumbents).  So, last year we (the
> operations team) decided to try a new approach to see if it made a
> difference in the number of candidates.  This was based on some informal
> feedback of individuals who said they were interested in the position, but
> based on the others that already had submitted their name, they didn't
> think they were popular enough to win... so they didn't even try.  We
> decided to keep all the names and why me's of the people running until the
> submission deadline and then post the people that submitted.  There was a
> much larger pool of applicants (more than double), which seemed like a
> success. Although, admittedly there can be many reasons for more applicants
> outside of the one we thought might be the case...
>
> This year, we followed the same process as last year and included a review
> of this for the Board of Directors, and no responses or feedback was
> received on the election page. The time for that level of feedback was
> back when it was requested during the April Board meeting (
> https://docs.google.com/a/owasp.org/document/d/1uQLJi0Hghlfe7AkMEWpm6yUmqIhtuSn-b4PHHH1eORE/edit
> )
>
> *I fully acknowledge that we (the operations team) or me (leading that
> team) could have and should have done better in reaching out to the
> community as a whole for feedback on the process.  I apologize for that
> mistake, because all of you have meaningful and important feedback that was
> neglected.*
>
> I hope that OWASP can move forward with an improved workflow for this -
> taking into consideration where we are currently at and what we have
> learned.  I think it is appropriate for community members that are
> interested in this initiative to get involved in the process and policies
> surrounding the election, and work with Kelly to implement.  Sign up here
> <http://owasp.force.com/volunteers/GW_Volunteers__VolunteersJobListing> to
> get involved now. Additionally, *Kelly is in the process of reaching out
> to all the current candidates to get their ok in posting their name and why
> me on the wiki page.  *
>
> Since we are mid-cycle and expectations have been posted on the wiki page,
> I and support Kelly with not releasing this list until we receive the
> candidate authorizations.
>
> I do support changes to the workflow and involvement of the community
> (outside of the Board and current candidates).
>
> If there are more questions, happy to answer them!
>
> Sarah
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Eoin <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> So Are the nominees going to be released before the nomination deadline
>> or no?
>> I think this is a fair question many leaders are asking.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 15 July 2014 00:53, Michael Coates <michael.coates at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Tony,
>>>
>>> Just to clarify, the OWASP staff strongly supports the mission and I've
>>> seen that many times over.
>>>
>>> The election process has evolved year of year and every action is taken
>>> with the best intent to build and foster a great pool of candidates.
>>> Although we're a bit late in the game (e.g. mid process) we can still hold
>>> a thoughtful discussion if we should make adjustments. It's never ideal to
>>> change something midstream, but let's just consider that in the risk /
>>> benefit.
>>>
>>> So, as Josh correctly mentioned, let's have interested people work with
>>> Kelly/ops team and create the elections group to jointly determine if there
>>> should be a change. The ops team has done a great job so far and if
>>> something should be considered to change then please work together to do so.
>>>
>>> Glad to see all the energy and interest!
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael Coates
>>> @_mwc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Tony Turner <tony.turner at owasp.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm all for a reduction in committee bloat. I don't think we need more
>>>> committees. It's a simple issue. OWASP should be and historically has been
>>>> committed to openness. I'd simply call for staff to support the OWASP
>>>> mission. Be open.
>>>>  On Jul 14, 2014 5:48 PM, "Jim Manico" <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>  Exactly, Eoin. The current staff runs the board election process. The
>>>>> board is, by design, keeping OUT of the board elections operation decision
>>>>> making process.
>>>>>
>>>>> The staff did ask the board to help spread awareness about the
>>>>> election and to encourage other qualifying leaders to run for the board. So
>>>>> huzzah to that. https://www.owasp.org/index.php/2014_Board_Elections
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps we should consider an election committee instead of making
>>>>> this solely staff run in the future? What do you think Tony? Certainly I do
>>>>> not think the board should be involved due to conflict of interest as well
>>>>> as just regular ol separation of duties between board and staff.
>>>>>
>>>>> Aloha,
>>>>> Jim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  Good question: I asked other Board/ED if we could publish the
>>>>> nominees. Answer was election is nothing to do with board but staff run - I
>>>>> agree 100%
>>>>>
>>>>>  But publishing nominees is not "running" / interfering with the
>>>>> election, I believe anyways :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Eoin Keary
>>>>> Owasp Global Board
>>>>> +353 87 977 2988
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 14 Jul 2014, at 22:31, Tony Turner <tony.turner at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>   Then why is Eoin stating this was a joint board/ED decision? I'm
>>>>> confused. Which is it?
>>>>> On Jul 14, 2014 5:15 PM, "Jim Manico" <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>  Tony,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The elections were not at all board-run, they are 100% staff-run. In
>>>>>> fact, the board specifically chose to keep out of election operations in
>>>>>> order to ensure objectivity...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Jim
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/14/14, 11:11 AM, Tony Turner wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes Eoin, but according to you, it's appears you are an outlier.
>>>>>> On Jul 14, 2014 5:09 PM, "Eoin Keary" <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Rather cynical.
>>>>>>> I'm board. Want open.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Eoin Keary
>>>>>>> Owasp Global Board
>>>>>>> +353 87 977 2988 <%2B353%2087%20977%202988>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 14 Jul 2014, at 21:56, Tony Turner <tony.turner at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   It seems to me that it's in the best interest of the board to
>>>>>>> keep it closed. It's in the best interest of OWASP to keep it open. I'm not
>>>>>>> accusing anyone of anything but I'd really like to know why this was
>>>>>>> refused.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Tony Turner
>>>>>>> OWASP Orlando Chapter Leader
>>>>>>> On Jul 14, 2014 4:53 PM, <martin.knobloch at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>> Last year, this has been done this wy the first time. If I recall
>>>>>>>> correctly, it was said to be evaluated it this works better or less than
>>>>>>>> the previous 'open candidate list' approach, but I cannot recall any
>>>>>>>> evaluation what has worked better.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> -martin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>> From: Eoin Keary <eoin.keary at owasp.org>
>>>>>>>> Sender: owasp-leaders-bounces at lists.owasp.org
>>>>>>>> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 21:42:54
>>>>>>>> To: Matt Tesauro<matt.tesauro at owasp.org>
>>>>>>>> Cc: OWASP Leaders<owasp-leaders at lists.owasp.org>
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Owasp-leaders] OWASP Board Election - What do you
>>>>>>>> want in a
>>>>>>>>         board candidate?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing listOWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.orghttps://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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Eoin Keary
>> OWASP Member
>> https://twitter.com/EoinKeary
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20140715/40a5df1a/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list