Members Comments On OWASP membership - Revision history

Davidribyrne@yahoo.com: /* Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership */

2007-01-08T00:24:05Z

‎Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership

Rficcaglia at 18:52, 6 January 2007

2007-01-06T18:52:08Z

Dinis.cruz: /* Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership */

2007-01-06T10:27:22Z

‎Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership

Dinis.cruz at 00:29, 6 January 2007

2007-01-06T00:29:33Z

Dinis.cruz at 00:27, 6 January 2007

2007-01-06T00:27:46Z

Dinis.cruz: /* Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership */

2007-01-06T00:25:01Z

‎Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership

Dinis.cruz: /* New Owasp Evangelist and OWASP membership */

2007-01-06T00:22:33Z

‎New Owasp Evangelist and OWASP membership

Dinis.cruz: /* Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership */

2007-01-06T00:22:01Z

‎Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership

Dinis.cruz: /* Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership */

2007-01-05T17:21:51Z

‎Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership

Dinis.cruz at 07:16, 24 December 2006

2006-12-24T07:16:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:24, 8 January 2007
Line 6:		Line 6:

	== Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership ==		== Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership ==
		+
		+	''"There are two reason that I haven't joined. First, as many people already pointed out, $100 is too much money for no return. Feeling good about helping OWASP isn't enough. Second, how exactly does OWASP spend the money? Perhaps there is a detailed report, but it isn't easy to find. If I'm going to donate money to a charity (i.e. no return), I want specifics about how the money is used. I'm not suggesting anything improper is happening, but I still want to know."''
		+
		+	....

	''"To cut the long short: It is not that expensive but it is hard to find too much added value."''		''"To cut the long short: It is not that expensive but it is hard to find too much added value."''

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:52, 6 January 2007
Line 183:		Line 183:

	''So could you help sum up why you think XYZ should join? What could we really get out of membership? I read the "Benefits of Membership" of the web site and while they are all good things, their value is hard to judge."''		''So could you help sum up why you think XYZ should join? What could we really get out of membership? I read the "Benefits of Membership" of the web site and while they are all good things, their value is hard to judge."''
		+
		+	....
		+
		+	''"I would like to see more local events where knowledge can be collaboratively created and shared. Certainly the product of the local events can and should be aggregated up to the full membership body, and rareified in the lists and best practices documented here. However, I would like to point to another Silicon Valley professional group whose model and value proposition I prefer: SDForum. They hold dozens of informational sessions locally and always offer 2 methods of attendance: free for members, pay $10-25 at the door for non-members. For very special keynote events, they charge members a nominal $10-25 and non-members the full $30-50. This puts the membership benefit in sharp relief, at every event. Of course, the underlying value proposition to both options is the quality of the events themselves. I find myself opting to subscribe to an annual membership when several of the speakers/events are compelling. And opting out when they seem superfluous. To this end, they publish a calendar of events well in advance. To be fair, they have been around for years, so they have the infrastructure and cash flow to manage all this. Finally, I would second the suggestion above that those who contribute time and energy should have a reduced or free membership to recognize their valuable contributions."''

	== email sent: "New Owasp Evangelist and OWASP membership" ==		== email sent: "New Owasp Evangelist and OWASP membership" ==

@@ Line 152: / Line 152: @@
 ....
-''"Our company has joined OWASP and paid membership middle of this year 2006. The main issue was to find the budget owner for ING."''
+''"Our company has joined OWASP and paid membership middle of this year 2006. The main issue was to find the budget owner for XYZ."''
 ....

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:29, 6 January 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	This page contains the feedback I (--) received following the "New Owasp Evangelist and OWASP membership" (on 16 Dec 2006) email (which you can find at the end of this page).	+	This page contains the feedback I ([[User:Dinis.cruz\|Dinis Cruz]]) received following the "New Owasp Evangelist and OWASP membership" (on 16 Dec 2006) email (which you can find at the end of this page).

	This was very good feedback, and I will be working on a document to address the issues raised		This was very good feedback, and I will be working on a document to address the issues raised

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:27, 6 January 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	This page contains the feedback I received ~~when I sent my {pt title~~ and ~~link here}~~ email which you can find at the end of this page	+	This page contains the feedback I (--) received following the "New Owasp Evangelist and OWASP membership" (on 16 Dec 2006) email (which you can find at the end of this page).
		+
		+	This was very good feedback, and I will be working on a document to address the issues raised
		+
		+

	== Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership ==		== Members response to Dinis Cruz email on OWASP Membership ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:25, 6 January 2007
Line 179:		Line 179:

	''So could you help sum up why you think XYZ should join? What could we really get out of membership? I read the "Benefits of Membership" of the web site and while they are all good things, their value is hard to judge."''		''So could you help sum up why you think XYZ should join? What could we really get out of membership? I read the "Benefits of Membership" of the web site and while they are all good things, their value is hard to judge."''
−
−	~~....~~
−
−	~~''""''~~
−
−	~~....~~
−
−	~~''""''~~
−
−	~~....~~
−
−	~~''""''~~

	== email sent: "New Owasp Evangelist and OWASP membership" ==		== email sent: "New Owasp Evangelist and OWASP membership" ==

@@ Line 192: / Line 192: @@
 ''""''
-== New Owasp Evangelist and OWASP membership ==
+== email sent: "New Owasp Evangelist and OWASP membership" ==
 (note: this is a variation of the email sent a couple days to the owasp-leaders mailing list (for reference the owasp-leaders mailing list contains all OWASP projects  leaders and all local OWASP chapters leaders))

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:22, 6 January 2007
Line 149:		Line 149:

	''"Our company has joined OWASP and paid membership middle of this year 2006. The main issue was to find the budget owner for ING."''		''"Our company has joined OWASP and paid membership middle of this year 2006. The main issue was to find the budget owner for ING."''
		+
		+	....
		+
		+	''"Anyway, the reason I'm sending this mail, is that you wanted to know about why people do or do not become an OWASP member.''
		+
		+	''I don't know if my company is an OWASP member or not. The company is not listed on URL https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Membership#Current_OWASP_Members but I don't know if that list is complete.''
		+
		+	''As for me personally, I don't see any benefits for me. On one of our local chapter meetings, someone once described us (the people being there) as motivated professionals who devote their own time and effort in promoting development of more secure web applications. As such, I fail to see why I should have to pay for the privilege to participate in those efforts?''
		+
		+	''When I review the membership benefits that are mentioned on https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Membership then I must conclude that all benefits that might be of interest to me, already apply to me right now:''
		+
		+	*'' "active voice in the development of OWASP Materials": what do you think we are discussing about on chapter meetings?''
		+	* ''the electronic notification: you mean OWASP will start holding publications for non-members (sort of like privileged subscriptions on security bulletins or the downloads for pay like the ISO documents)?''
		+	* ''the right to bragg about being an OWASP member: I fail to see the advantage in that (it's not like a certification that proves you have a basic understanding of the topic: anyone who pays gets this right)
		+	* '' colaboration: I think we got this one covered nicely with the mailing lists, web sites and regular email?''
		+	*'' discounted fees: you want me to pay for discounts that my company will get?''
		+
		+	''Please don't get me wrong: I fully support the notion of corporate sponsoring through memberships, but, like I said, I do not want to pay extra in addition to sacrificing my personal time to the good cause. I don't think that the individual memberships, as they are offered today, are a good thing.''
		+
		+	''I hope I did not spoil your mood too much, but I think that the fact that I'm sending this message at all, already indicates that I do care about OWASP, and that you will keep on trying to convert us into a flock of devote believers?''
		+	''"''
		+	....
		+
		+	''"Your message about OWASP membership couldn't have come at a better time. ''
		+
		+	''I'm the Technical Lead for XYZ's ABC product. I'm trying to help convince upper management that XYZ should join OWASP.''
		+
		+	''So far the reaction has been cool to the idea with a request for more information as to what the business benefits would be.''
		+
		+	''So could you help sum up why you think XYZ should join? What could we really get out of membership? I read the "Benefits of Membership" of the web site and while they are all good things, their value is hard to judge."''
		+
		+	....
		+
		+	''""''
		+
		+	....
		+
		+	''""''

	....		....

@@ Line 130: / Line 130: @@
 ''And, of course I'm not happy with the lack of top ten discussion and the way it was being handled in the past. Unless, I was removed from the top ten list, I can't understand the lack of discussion."''
 ....
@@ Line 138: / Line 153: @@
 ''""''