TSC Public Reports

Chair: Kevin Hammond

Meeting Facilitation: MIXED

Strengths: Consistent structure with agendas pasted into chat at meeting start. Time awareness: "conscious of the time," "we're already at the 40 minute mark." Solicits input: "Does anyone have anything else they would like to add to the agenda?" was a consistent pattern across the series.

Weaknesses: Allows significant drift — the October 22 Discord access discussion consumed excessive time. Lost control during conflicts, most notably the February 6 Ryan Williams incident. Meetings frequently ran overtime with rushed endings and deferred agenda items.

Decision-Making: INCONSISTENT

Clear when used: October 15 — "So all that's every voting member in favor as I understand it. Carried unanimously." December 17 hard fork naming vote properly conducted with clear count (7 Yes, 1 Abstain).

Problematic patterns: December 10 — "should we approve this set of updated limits... I think we have agreement" without formal vote. March 18 — "I think we have agreement" used multiple times without polling members. Pattern of deferred decisions: "Let's take a vote out of band on how to proceed."

Preparation: CONSISTENTLY GOOD

Always had agendas ready at meeting start. Systematically reviewed previous actions. January 14: when late due to technical issues, immediately posted agenda upon joining. This was the single most consistent strength across the entire series.

Conflict Management: AVOIDANCE PATTERN

Critical failure — Ryan Williams incident (February 6, 2026): Ryan stated: "I will take it as disrespect... I expect a response to this topic even if it's not one I agree with." Kevin's response: "Perhaps we should take this offline." This deflection of a substantive governance concern from a voting member exemplifies the pattern.

Other examples: February 18 — when Neil Davies became heated about the constitution, Kevin deflected rather than engaged. Pattern of deferring contentious issues rather than resolving them directly.

Strategic Direction: LIMITED

Focused primarily on operational matters rather than articulating broader TSC vision. February 11: "I believe that there should have been a technical and a legal constitutional review... before it was put on chain" — a rare strategic assertion. Kevin rarely went beyond compliance and process, with brief strategic moments the exception rather than the rule.

Pre-Election vs. Post-Election

Kevin's attendance improved from 17% pre-election (1/6 meetings) to 100% post-election (17/17 meetings) — a dramatic transformation demonstrating accountability to the electoral mandate. This shift from near-absent to fully committed chair represents the most significant individual leadership improvement observed.

Vice Chair: Adam Dean (October 2025), then VACANT

Adam Dean served as Vice Chair through October 2025, attending 2/6 pre-election meetings. Chaired the October 29 meeting in Kevin's absence with adequate technical engagement: "I'm personally against being prescriptive about any particular technologies." Properly transitioned out when his term ended.

Six-Month Vacancy: After Adam Dean stepped down, the Vice Chair position remained vacant from November 2025 through March 2026 — the entire post-election period. Despite being mentioned in every meeting, no volunteer emerged:

• October 15: Terence asks about nominations. No volunteers.
• November 26: Neil Davies attempts to formalize process. Devolves into procedural delays.
• December 3: Alexander Moser: "Can we just agree that Kevin is chair and remove it from next week's agenda?" — even the Chair election required forcing.
• January 14: Terence emphasizes urgency. Kevin jokes: "you are all vice chairs if nobody is nominated."
• February 11: Neil declines the permanent role "due to other commitments." No other volunteers.
• January 28: Neil had to chair in emergency when Kevin was absent — the single-point-of-failure risk materialized.
• March 25: Position still vacant at end of series.

Secretary: Terence ‘Tex’ McCutcheon

Administrative Performance: COMPETENT

Executed administrative duties well across the series, providing institutional memory from serving as secretary across multiple Intersect committees.

Boundary Respect: PROBLEMATIC

October 15 — confrontational about chair rotation: "this has been the only committee that has given push back... without a true reasonable rationale other than we got kicked on the playground 6 months ago." Crossed from administrative support into strategic advocacy, positioning himself as a participant rather than a facilitator.

Communication: EFFECTIVE

Meeting coordination and channel management generally functional, though he later criticized the committee himself: "it's a bunch of really, really smart [people] talking in a room about the same issues over and over and over again."

Secretary: Ben Hart

Administrative Performance: HIGH QUALITY

Produced high-quality minutes and action tracking during his tenure (approximately November 2025 through February 2026).

Boundary Issue: PROBLEMATIC

December 10 — brought guest Lloyd Duhon without prior approval. Kevin: "I was a little surprised because I wasn't expecting him." Introducing guests without Chair authorization represents a clear boundary violation for an administrative role.

Secretary: Bosko Majdanac

Administrative Performance: PROFESSIONAL

Professional execution of administrative duties. Managed polls, action items, and multi-channel coordination effectively. December 3: "I'm not a voting member. So I cannot" — properly recognized his limitations.

Weaknesses:

March 11 — rare lapse with calendar/daylight saving confusion and admission of forgetting to send invitations: "it's not probably but very likely that I didn't send the manual invitation at all." Budget process confusion: "but the only thing I know for this week is to iterate in a feedback loop... nothing on how it should end up being."

Major Governance Failures

1. Six-month Vice Chair vacancy

From November 2025 through March 2026, the committee operated without a Vice Chair. This concentrated all leadership authority in the Chair, eliminated succession planning, and materialized as an actual risk when Neil Davies had to chair a January 28 meeting in emergency. The persistent vacancy despite universal acknowledgment reveals deep institutional demoralization.

2. Ryan Williams conflict deflection (February 6, 2026)

When a voting member explicitly demanded a substantive response about committee scope and stated he would take non-response "as disrespect," Kevin's deflection to "take this offline" exemplified a pattern of avoiding difficult governance conversations. Substantive conflicts are treated as interpersonal problems to be managed privately rather than governance issues to be resolved publicly.

3. Decision-making by silence

The pattern of "does anyone object?... I'm taking that as agreement" replaced formal voting across many meetings. While efficient, this approach lacks democratic legitimacy and makes it impossible to assess actual support levels. Items presented as unanimous "decisions" may simply reflect members' unwillingness to speak up rather than genuine consensus.

4. Quorum failures

Multiple meetings barely achieved quorum or failed entirely. February 18: Kevin acknowledged only 5 voting members present, meaning any decisions were "provisional." March 25: Neil called out "minimal quorum... there are only five people here." Yet substantive discussions proceeded regardless.

5. Secretary boundary violations

Both Tex McCutcheon and Ben Hart crossed administrative boundaries at different points. McCutcheon's advocacy overreach and Hart's unauthorized guest introduction suggest the secretary role lacks adequate definition and enforcement across Intersect committees — the same pattern observed in the GMC.