> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://committees.docs.intersectmbo.org/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://committees.docs.intersectmbo.org/intersect-steering-committee/working-group/working-groups/working-group-meeting-notes/2026/march-5-2026.md). # March 5 2026 ### Attendees: | Name | Attendance | Role | | ---------------------------------------------------- | ---------- | ------------------------------------- | | [Simo Simovic](mailto:simo.simovic@intersectmbo.org) | Yes | WG Lead/Secretary | | Thiago Nunes | Yes | Intersect Member | | Vaibhav S | Yes | Intersect Member | | Maureen Wepngong | No | DRep | | Terence McCutcheon | Yes | Intersect | | Lorenzo Bruno | Yes | Head of Product Curation at Intersect | | Jose Miguel De Gamboa | No | ISC Voting Member | | Randy | No |


| | Wilco van de Burgwal | Yes |


| | Veleria Devaux | No |


| | Gnobudy John | No |


| Recording: [Intersect Governance WG Weekly - 2026/03/05 14:56 CET - Recording](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I0t117koij-vOFxlvGSH1wdKfLZVLkP0/view) Transcript: [Intersect Governance WG Weekly - 2026/03/05 14:56 CET - Transcript](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n2WMwEcd__GaLoq0bl3TP_ZHtKPhDu0Ml8DWs85NIWY/edit?tab=t.0) ### Agenda * Committee Member dismissal & replacement policy
### Decisions/Actions | Discussion Point | Notes | Actions: Responsible / Note | | ------------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Document & Folder Accessibility |

- Gintama raised concerns about making the working group Google Drive and documentation transparently available to the public.

Terence shared that he structured the Open Source Committee (OSC) folders to automatically grant viewer access to anyone with the link.

| Simo & Lorenzo: Ensure the core Governance working group drive is set to allow comment access for members and explore adding these directory links to GitBook/Discord. | | A phased approach to Attendance & Accountability |

- The group debated the existing 8-week timeline for dismissal, with general consensus that 8 weeks of total inactivity is too long under a 2-year term.

- Simo emphasized the need to differentiate between bad behavior (ghosting) and excused absences (notifying the secretary/chair due to health or work).- Lorenzo suggested a phased system instead of jumping straight to extreme dismissal: Inactivity → Lose Reward → Lose Voting Power → Formal Dismissal Case.

| Working Group: Outline a step-by-step accountability framework on the Miro board, defining how members lose and gradually earn back their rights through consistent behavior. | | Quantifying Committee Member Contributions |

- The group analyzed how to measure performance based on the newly approved Version 1 baseline.

- Gintama suggested tracking participation in formal asynchronous votes where rationales are required.

- Thiago noted that if a member misses a live meeting but actively anchors localized execution (like running regional workshops), their structural contribution should still be deemed fulfilled.

| Lorenzo: Use these scenarios to draft the parameters for the Version 2 guidance documentation. | | Standardizing Meeting Cadences & Mandatory Calls |

- Thiago proposed that chairs should have the power to mandate attendance for high-priority alignment meetings (e.g., ahead of a critical vote), with a baseline warning system if missed.

- The team noted that enforcing rigid cross-committee rules is difficult because cadences vary wildly: the Budget committee meets twice a week, while the MCC meets bi-weekly.

| Working Group: Keep discussing whether minimum thresholds can be standardized or if authority should be delegated to individual committee charters. | | Rewards Disputes & Value Pegging |

- Thiago highlighted a potential loophole where inactive members could falsify their text-based monthly contribution reports just to claim starter rewards.

- Thiago also echoed board suggestions to peg governance stipends to stable dollar values rather than raw ADA to insulate volunteers from market volatility.

|

Thiago: Prepare to bring the currency-pegging topic back to the ISC for broader strategic review

.Lorenzo: Look into a structural "challenge window" between reward claiming and payout.

| --- # Agent Instructions This documentation is published with GitBook. GitBook is the documentation platform designed so that both humans and AI agents can read, navigate, and reason over technical content effectively. Learn more at gitbook.com. ## Querying This Documentation If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation by asking a question. Perform an HTTP GET request on the following URL with the `ask` and `goal` query parameters: ``` GET https://committees.docs.intersectmbo.org/intersect-steering-committee/working-group/working-groups/working-group-meeting-notes/2026/march-5-2026.md?ask=&goal= ``` `ask` is the immediate question: it should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language. `goal` is what the user is ultimately trying to achieve, the reason they need the answer. Sharing it helps GitBook give you a better, more relevant answer. A goal is most helpful when it describes the outcome the user wants rather than restating the question. For example, with `ask=how do I create an API token`, a goal like `automate deployments from our CI pipeline` lets GitBook tailor the answer to that use case. The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation. Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.