[Owasp-leaders] Meetup.com goes Deep Politcal

Bjoern Kimminich bjoern.kimminich at owasp.org
Thu Feb 16 20:45:55 UTC 2017


Google (among others) openly stated disagreement as well, still here we are: Using their email infrastructure to throw more kindle into this unnecessary debate.

 

If for every email sent to this thread, we’d have instead fixed one broken Wiki page, corrected a typo in a random README – whatever: How much further that could have brought OWASP! :)

 

So, let me „neutralize“ this email immediately with this small boyscout commit: https://github.com/OWASP/owasp-summit-2017/commit/6c9019bf12a83cbf5832d11af008ff1dd21ff20d

 

Björn

#everycommitcounts

 

Von: owasp-leaders-bounces+bjoern.kimminich=owasp.org at lists.owasp.org [mailto:owasp-leaders-bounces+bjoern.kimminich=owasp.org at lists.owasp.org] Im Auftrag von psiinon
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 16. Februar 2017 19:23
An: owasp-leaders at lists.owasp.org
Betreff: Re: [Owasp-leaders] Meetup.com goes Deep Politcal

 

Aaaaand this is the most active discussion on this list for months.

If only we had this amount of passion about appsec :P

 

On 16 Feb 2017 5:47 p.m., "Ralph Durkee (OWASP)" <Ralph.Durkee at owasp.org <mailto:Ralph.Durkee at owasp.org> > wrote:

I think most would agree that OWASP should avoid linking to political websites when possible. 

If a website promoted joining either the DNC or RNC on it's home page or via emails, then I think most would agree it's political.

If a website promotes joining the #resist movement or the tea party movement on it's home page or via emails, then should it be considered political?  I think so.

-- Ralph Durkee
 

On 02/15/2017 09:12 PM, Brad Causey wrote:

This is the page I think everyone is discussing. (See attached) 

 

Basically, Meetup has declared that they are "on the left" pretty clearly. Now, as most of you well know I'm pretty far right as far as Americans go. 

 

With that bias declared up front, I don't see any reason to move away from Meetup. OWASP using their services has nothing to do with the fact that they've chosen sides in politics. We aren't endorsing their position, nor should we. 

 

Unless we plan to analyze the political statements of all affiliates, vendors, sponsors, etc., I don't feel any action is necessary. If their product fits our needs, then let's use them. 

 

I would even argue that discontinuing use of their services based on their political beliefs would be making a political statement of our own. Something I don't think we want to do. 

 

Let's leave the politics out of it if we can. 

 

Have a great evening everyone! 

 

 

 

 




-Brad Causey
CISSP, MCSE, C|EH, CIFI, CGSP

http://www.owasp.org
--
"Si vis pacem, para bellum"
--

 

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:53 PM, Justin Ferguson <justin.ferguson at owasp.org <mailto:justin.ferguson at owasp.org> > wrote:

How is this political?  



 

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:34 PM Ralph Durkee (OWASP) <Ralph.Durkee at owasp.org <mailto:Ralph.Durkee at owasp.org> > wrote:

I understand we have a lot of usage of meetup and making quick changes
would consume resources we can't spare.  I also understand there is no
easy or quick answer. However with such a service we must to link to the
meetup website, and the political nature of their home page infringes on
OWASP attempt to be politically neutral.  I'm not expecting a quick
change that would be disruptive to progress, but we should consider what
what their free speech does to politicize our organization, we should
talk to them and consider the politicizing effect in evaluating future
or expanded usage of meetup solutions.

-- Ralph Durkee


On 02/14/2017 09:21 PM, Andrew van der Stock wrote:
> 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

_______________________________________________
OWASP-Leaders mailing list
OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org <mailto:OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org> 
https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders

-- 

-- 

Justin Ferguson
OWASP-Kansas City Chapter Leader

justin.ferguson at owasp.org <mailto:justin.ferguson at owasp.org> 


_______________________________________________
OWASP-Leaders mailing list
OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org <mailto:OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org> 
https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders

 

 


_______________________________________________
OWASP-Leaders mailing list
OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org <mailto: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/20170216/0730cc7d/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2440642 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20170216/0730cc7d/attachment-0001.png>


More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list