[Owasp-leaders] rough consensus & running code
bev.corwin at owasp.org
Sun May 7 22:55:18 UTC 2017
Thanks for the update & clarification Tiffany, Good to know. Sean also
submitted a number of requests. We were asked to submit ideas for helping
OWASP so we put together a number of concepts funding requests. In fact, we
noticed that one of our board members recently submitted similar ideas as
our proposals (grant team funding), and received a great deal of support.
Happy to hear that there is support for similar concepts, regardless. They
will help OWASP in the long run, IMHO. I did not attend the board meeting
where they were discussed, however, I did assume incorrectly that we would
at least receive the courtesy of some kind of notification from someone.
Sean and I (OWASP Brooklyn) also submitted a number of requests last year
to Kate and Andrew which were effectively ignored, as well: CSAW,
OpenCamps, etc.. I would assume that many other chapters received the same
cold shoulder when submitting, and that it wasn't just OWASP Brooklyn that
was treated with such disregard. Thank you and best wishes, Bev
On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Tiffany Long <tiffany.long at owasp.org> wrote:
> Dear Bev,
> The only list of requests I can find are the requests y'all made for the
> Annual Budget to the tune about $560,000.
> These requests were made directly to the Board of Directors as part of the
> annual budget process. As such the Staff did not handle any aspect of
> them. They were however, referenced in the board meetings (as this is
> where the budget is discussed when the board discusses it publicly) and
> they did not make it to the final budget document.
> As items added to the budget are not funding requests
> <https://tracking.cirrusinsight.com/5a8df58d-c179-4516-808a-5a2ac7d43c15/owasp-org-index-php-funding> and
> as these items were documented with the public board meetings, the leader's
> list, and the board list, and did not make it through to the budget, I did
> not realize that they might be what you were referring to. I apologize, it
> did not occur to me that OWASP Brooklyn was not following the board
> discussion of such a large requested amount. I will take this as a lesson
> next year during the budget process to make sure to track these requests
> myself so that I can notify the requesters of the Board's decision.
> If these are not the requests you are referring to, please direct me to
> the ones you did mean and I will try to sort out the issue.
> Tiffany Long
> Community Manager
> On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 10:23 PM, Bev Corwin <bev.corwin at owasp.org> wrote:
>> Hi Arthur, Local chapter teams should provide this together, not only one
>> or two chapters. We can dig into this more deeply in meetings when
>> reviewing the handbook. Obviously and apparently, global side is not able
>> to accurately gauge or track, unfortunately. All mappings should be
>> combined with other local chapters' experiences, as well. Some conflicts of
>> interest are blatant, and I expect that they will be discussed in more
>> detail on Monday. Best wishes, Bev
>> On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 5:15 PM, Arthur Hedge <ahedge at castleventures.com>
>>> Why don’t you do the mapping of the conflicts of interests, since you
>>> seem to know what they are and then share them with the rest of the OWASP
>>> leaders before you continue with more accusations?
>>> Arthur J. Hedge III CISSP
>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OWASP-Leaders