cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Advocate II

Re: (ISC)2 Board of Directors election

Did everyone see the email that was just sent (I received it about 90 mins ago) formally announcing @dcontesti's and another lady, Marilyn Moux's petitions to be added to the ballot?

 

petition-email.png

 

Community Champion

Re: (ISC)2 Board of Directors election


@gthompson wrote:

Many "qualified" candidates did not score sufficiently high enough to make the top 8, this does not mean that they were not qualified. 

So, what's magic about the number 8?  I might be naive but I would think the board would endorse all the candidates they believe to be qualified.

Contributor I

Re: (ISC)2 Board of Directors election

Didn't get that email, although I have endorsed Diane already.

Sincerely,

Mike Glassman, CISSP
Iguana man
Newcomer III

Re: (ISC)2 Board of Directors election

@AlecTrevelyan wrote: Did everyone see the email that was just sent ...

@MikeGlassman Didn't receive it either

 

Me neither. Something screwy going on with the email blasts. That makes two from two not received

I've asked the question on LinkedIn - seems there's a number of members not receiving these notifications. I've raised both non-receipts as an issue with Member Services

Newcomer III

Re: (ISC)2 Board of Directors election

In the spirit of openness, just so that everyone is aware: the debate has spilled over into LinkedIn with some posts on the topic by the current Chair, and some responses by Community members: 

 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/women-isc2-slate-heres-why-happened-jennifer-minella/

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/other-things-you-should-know-isc2-board-nominations-history-minella/

Advocate I

Re: (ISC)2 Board of Directors election


@TrickyDicky wrote:

In the spirit of openness, just so that everyone is aware: the debate has spilled over into LinkedIn with some posts on the topic by the current Chair, and some responses by Community members: 

 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/women-isc2-slate-heres-why-happened-jennifer-minella/

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/other-things-you-should-know-isc2-board-nominations-history-minella/


Honestly, what is the purpose of this Official forum when the Chairperson does respond, but rather takes to Twitter and LinkedIn to promote their own agenda? This is a prime example of the Board failing to communicate with the membership. They operate in a vacuum until their morals are challenged. Can that be good for the membership?

 

What is disturbing about the LinkedIn form letter response is the admission of guilt when it comes to the internal biases of the committee, both past and present. We are "fixing" the process. It is a "pet project". We are "considering using a 3rd party to recruit and vet from our member pool to remove any bias or inconsistency the board may be subject to". Really, what is going on that we don't know about?

 

The membership must have the ability examine/audit the meeting notes and work items of all Committees. We need full disclosure on who was considered, their raw score, and the decisions made by the Board. We need records transparency and Freedom to Information!

Advocate I

Re: (ISC)2 Board of Directors election


@dcontesti wrote:

@wimremes wrote:

Why the membership would put forward a candidate that already served for 15 years (or more?) and simultaneously complain about board members seeking a second term is frankly beyond me.


@wimremes Yes, I served on the board for a while Not sure it was 15 years but won't argue that point.  I would like to go back and look at history:

 

Diana Contesti

Independent Candidate for the (ISC)2 Board Ballot.

 


The current Chairperson did not have kind words for @dcontesti and the all amazing work she did. Who forced her off the Board? Why was there a need to change the Bylaws? The post only hints at the internal politics "I'll let you use your imagination to think of all the reasons why that may be."

Advocate I

Re: (ISC)2 Board of Directors election


@dcontesti wrote:

@wimremes wrote:

Why the membership would put forward a candidate that already served for 15 years (or more?) and simultaneously complain about board members seeking a second term is frankly beyond me.


@wimremes Yes, I served on the board for a while Not sure it was 15 years but won't argue that point.  I would like to go back and look at history:

 

Diana Contesti

Independent Candidate for the (ISC)2 Board Ballot.

 


The current Chairperson did not have kind words for @dcontesti and the all amazing work she did. Who forced her off the Board? Why was there a need to change the Bylaws? The post only hints at the internal politics in passing and I quote: I'll let you use your imagination to think of all the reasons why that may be.

Community Champion

Re: (ISC)2 Board of Directors election

@AppDefects 

 

Not going to get into mud slinging with anyone over this election or anything else.  I will take the moral high ground.  But be sure to read all the replies to  Ms.Minella and be sure to read "Tricky Dicky's" reply.

 

Here is my reply:

 

It's not some people, it was me, call a spade a spade. I have already admitted that I served on the board previously and I think you exaggerate the many, many, many years (one many would have gotten your point across).

 

And let’s be clear, I was NOT forced off the board. My term ended, I rolled off the board (END OF STORY). I was on the board when the new by-laws came for a vote of the board and voted yes (I did not abstain nor did I vote no) and I attended the required in-person meeting to vote FOR them.

 

We need to be clear there always were term limits (one could sit for two three-year terms, roll off the board for one year and then come back if they so desired and were able to be elected). Let’s also be clear on the by-laws. Term limits were not the only item that was being changed, it was one of several things. As with any legal and binding document, it can take time to change things to get the wording proper and ensure that all the T&Cs are correct.

 

Why did I throw my hat in. I saw diversity in terms of geography (Asia, the UK and India--- excellent) although folks from the rest of EMEA would have been good or even So. America which is very diverse in both languages and cultures, however no diversity in terms of ladies. There are currently four women on board and as of this election, it could potentially go down to two.

 

Additionally, there were two separate lists issued to members (one via e-mail and another via the web) and unfortunately, the lists differed (sure only by one person but still they differed…..confusing.)

 

Advocate I

Re: (ISC)2 Board of Directors election


@dcontesti wrote:

 

Why did I throw my hat in. I saw diversity in terms of geography (Asia, the UK and India--- excellent) although folks from the rest of EMEA would have been good or even So. America which is very diverse in both languages and cultures, however no diversity in terms of ladies. There are currently four women on board and as of this election, it could potentially go down to two.

 


I hope that you can bring some semblance of sanity and openness to the board. We need transparency to see who was considered. It should not be a national secret. Go for it. We are here to support you!