[Owasp-leaders] Meetup.com goes Deep Politcal

Haral Tsitsivas haral.tsitsivas at owasp.org
Wed Feb 15 21:51:40 UTC 2017

So it looks like it all depends on whether you agree or not agree with the
groups that meetup is promoting ;)
Without getting political here, statements that about half of the US
population is in disagreement is pure conjecture...

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Ralph Durkee (OWASP) <
Ralph.Durkee at owasp.org> wrote:

> Thanks.  I do think it is important to see the difference between Google
> taking a stand or exercising it's free speech, and what Meetup.com has done
> is to force it's political opinions out on all of the thousands of links
> that customers have to it's website.  There's over a 1000 links from
> OWASP.com to meetup.com. Which now have a stated political opinion that
> about half of the US population is clearly in disagreement.  This makes
> OWASP a conduit for Meetup.com's political message.  I don't see other
> organizations pushing divisive political agendas in this manner.
> -- Ralph Durkee
> On 02/14/2017 09:21 PM, Andrew van der Stock wrote:
> I will table a discussion (but not a vote, as that requires a motion and I
> don't see anything to motion on at this moment) for the next Board meeting
> on this topic, but in short, I don't believe this violates OWASP's
> non-political stance. The reality is that
>    - We use Google for e-mail, and they also have made many political
>    statements regarding immigration and diversity, as well as lobby very hard
>    in numerous ways that we can't really fathom.
>    - We use(d) Rackspace, and yet they sponsor a wide range of
>    organizations, including us.
>    - We use Verizon for telecommunications, and yet they stand against
>    network neutrality.
>    - We partner with many organizations, some of whom are direct
>    competitors.
> If OWASP constantly made decisions relating the shifting sands of lobbying
> and power and alliances, we'd still get it wrong as many large firms we
> rely on pay lobbyists to gain influence in US politics here and abroad. I
> think this is a good discussion to have, but I don't see any immediate
> change in our commercial posture unless it's particularly egregarious.
> Having a political stance baked into OWASP supply chain decisions is a
> political decision, whether we like it or not. Not making a decision is a
> political decision. I understand that we will not make everyone happy with
> this stance, but I think it should be up to the Board to evaluate this and
> make a decision if we change our approach or not. I do not presume to
> answer for the entire Board, because that's not how this works.
> thanks,
> Andrew
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 4:07 AM, Bev Corwin <bev.corwin at owasp.org> wrote:
>> +1
>> Bev
>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 7:54 PM, Sean Auriti <sean.auriti at owasp.org>
>> wrote:
>>> We could build our own websites per chapter and host them on Github.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20170215/ef4a6525/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list