Welcome to Intersect update #114

This week's update covers significant progress across Cardano governance and the van Rossem upgrade program. The Constitutional Committee election has been given more time to attract a competitive field of candidates. At the same time, the van Rossem upgrade advances with Preprod ratification achieved and the mainnet decision now within sight.

This edition also includes a timely explainer on ‘abstain’ voting in the Hydra platform. If you are a DRep participating in the 2026 budget process, it’s vital that you understand how unvoted proposals affect support calculations.

Contributors: Bosko M, Kevin H, Hard Fork Working Group, Parameter Committee, Intersect Technical Steering Committee

Cardano upgrades

The van Rossem upgrade program advanced this week as the Preprod hard fork initiation governance action achieved ratification, strengthening confidence in the rollout sequence toward mainnet. Alongside continued improvements in ecosystem readiness and tooling availability, the Hard Fork Working Group is now focused on the June 10 Preprod enactment and the readiness criteria that will support the upcoming mainnet go/no-go decision.

Node v11.0.1: Node v11.0.1 remains the mandatory upgrade path for infrastructure providers to successfully transition through the Protocol Version 11 hard fork boundary.

DB-Sync: DB-Sync v13.7.1.0 is the recommended version for ecosystem participants preparing for van Rossem. Operators currently running v13.7.0.5 remain compatible with the upgrade but should execute the migration script described in the release notes to ensure continued compatibility and smooth progression through the upgrade process.

Tooling: Ecosystem readiness continued to improve with the release of Ogmios v6.14.0.2 and Kupo v2.11.0.1 in Intersect-maintained repositories. Both tools will be incorporated into the mainnet readiness checklist used by the Hard Fork Working Group when evaluating hard fork initiation governance action submission readiness.

Timeline: The Preprod hard fork initiation governance action has achieved ratification and is scheduled for enactment on June 10. The Hard Fork Working Group's mainnet go/no-go decision meeting remains scheduled for June 15 and will be supported by a readiness checklist and defined decision criteria. If a positive decision is reached, mainnet hard fork initiation governance action submission is expected on June 15 or 16. Once submitted, the mainnet hard fork governance action may take up to about five weeks to be enacted.

Plutus cost models: The mainnet Plutus cost model protocol parameter update governance action continues to gain support and remains on track through the governance process as ecosystem participants prepare for Protocol Version 11 adoption.

Operational aspect: Communications teams remain aligned on all major developments and readiness changes. The Hard Fork Working Group continues to refine its readiness tracker and risk log, with several risks having their likelihood and impact reduced as ecosystem readiness improves. DApp teams will also be invited to report readiness against the emerging mainnet decision checklist to support a well-informed go/no-go recommendation.

Readiness tracking has been collaboratively maintained during the working group calls to better reflect overall ecosystem preparedness.

In Memory of Max van Rossem: “...Those who worked with Max remember him as sharp-minded, direct, deep, caring, and unwaveringly committed. He asked hard questions. He built. He showed up.…” 

Contributors: Civics committee, Thomas L, Ian H, Intersect, Intersect Steering Committee, Simo S, Intersect 

Constitutional Committee election update

The registration timeline for the upcoming Constitutional Committee (CC) election has been adjusted to protect the competitive integrity of the voting process.

As the initial registration deadline approached, a review of the current applications showed that only four candidates had finalized and submitted public applications. Because the election is designed to fill exactly four expiring seats, running a vote with an equal number of candidates and open positions would eliminate the competitive element of the off-chain community election.

During the civics committee call of June 4, members raised concerns that presenting a ballot without an actual choice would be an inefficient use of time for Delegated Representatives (DReps) and could run counter to the constitutional spirit of an ecosystem-wide vote. While backend data shows that two expiring CC members have applied to run again, others have explicitly declined to seek another term. However, there is still activity in the pipeline—multiple potential candidates are currently assessing the landscape and holding unsubmitted draft profiles within the portal.

To address the candidate shortage, the committee held an open floor debate to weigh the pros and cons of sticking to the original timeline versus extending the window to build a stronger candidate pool. To lock in a clear mandate, a formal poll was issued to the committee's voting members during the session. The motion to extend the registration window passed decisively with a 6–0 vote (and 1 abstention).

Updated timeline comparison

According to the old timeline schedule, candidate registration was originally set to close on June 7, followed by a promotion window leading into a July voting conclusion. To absorb the extension without shifting the critical end date, the backend administrative and audit windows have been compressed.

The full updated schedule is outlined below:

This adjustment ensures that the public's intended full 30-day voting timeframe remains entirely preserved, and the final on-chain milestone stays firmly on target.

Over the next two weeks, the committee will work alongside ecosystem partners—including the Cardano Foundation, Intersect, and others—to support potential candidates, share resources, and boost the visibility of the election.

committeeMinSize parameter update

Today, on behalf of the Civics Committee, the Technical Steering Committee, and with the recommendation of the Parameter Committee, Intersect submitted a governance action proposing to reduce the committeeMinSize parameter from 7 to 5.

At present, the Constitutional Committee consists of seven members and requires all seven seats to be filled in order to function. This creates an operational risk, as a single resignation, term expiration, or vacancy could prevent governance actions from progressing through ratification.

The proposal creates an operational buffer by reducing the minimum required committee size to five while maintaining a seven-seat Constitutional Committee. This means governance can continue operating while vacancies are addressed and replacements are elected and reduces the risk of governance processes being disrupted during periods of transition.

Importantly, this proposal isn't an attempt to reduce the size of the Constitutional Committee itself. The intention remains to maintain a seven-member committee through the regular election process. The proposal only changes the minimum number of active members required for governance to continue functioning.

As Cardano governance matures and more decisions move on-chain, operational resilience becomes increasingly important. This proposal seeks to ensure that temporary vacancies do not unnecessarily disrupt the governance process while preserving the constitutional safeguards that protect the ecosystem.

Beyond MVG briefing and strategic outlook

The Civics committee was joined by Danielle Stanko from the Beyond Minimum Viable Governance (Beyond MVG) team to review key findings and data-driven recommendations centered on protecting the stability of the governance framework.

Key insights and vulnerabilities highlighted

• Voting power concentration: On-chain data indicates a slow downward trend in the Nakamoto coefficient, pointing to an unconstrained accumulation of voting power among fewer, larger DReps as smaller actors drop out due to burnout or a lack of compensation.
• Participation impediments: Dormant network stake remains far higher than active voting footprints. Furthermore, analysis shows that generic wallet interfaces can skew delegation heavily toward top-ranked actors, driving the need for features like randomized or filtered "one-click" delegation tools to support medium-sized DReps.
• CC tooling and compensation deficits: Existing Constitutional Committee members face significant administrative overhead, a lack of dedicated auditing tools, and severe information asymmetries when vetting complex on-chain proposals.

The presentation recommended an immediate, minimum-tier reimbursement framework for incoming CC members to secure hardware and legal protections. It also emphasized that future long-term compensation models for the CC must be evaluated alongside DRep incentives to address ecosystem friction holistically.

Strategic integration for Q3-Q4

The data and framework provided in this presentation will form part of the foundation for the Civics Committee's upcoming planning sessions. This will help shape the committee's core deliverables, objectives, and KPIs for Q3-Q4 2026 and beyond, ensuring future initiatives directly target real-world governance bottlenecks.

Recently closed governance actions

Live governance actions*

*data from 2026-06-05 at 0000 UTC

Contributors: Simo S, Budget committee, Duncan S, Intersect 

Administration services

Within the Administration Services offered by Intersect, we post any administration-specific updates in our dedicated News and Updates area. This week we have posted an update on administration policies, covering new and updated policies that have come into effect for 2026. If you are a vendor, please take a moment to familiarize yourself with the changes.

We have also posted a new page covering our Stablecoin Conversion Service. We encourage vendors to review the details of this service, including the rationale and process.

Intersect 2026 budget process: why abstaining matters in the Hydra voting platform

As the 2026 budget voting process continues on Hydra, it's important to understand how proposal support is calculated and why recording an abstain vote can make a significant difference.

For each proposal, voters have three options:

✅ **Yes** – I support this proposal
❌ **No** – I do not support this proposal
⚪ **Abstain** – I am choosing not to participate in this proposal

A common misconception is that leaving a proposal unvoted is the same as abstaining. In Hydra, this is not the case.

Once a DRep votes on at least one proposal, their delegated stake becomes part of the **participating stake** for the voting event. Any proposal they do not explicitly vote on is effectively counted as part of the non-supporting stake for that proposal.

How support is calculated:

The current threshold for a proposal to pass is:

**67% support from participating stake**

Support is calculated as:

**Support % = Yes Votes ÷ (Participating Stake − Abstain Stake)**

For example:

* Participating Stake: 2.6 billion ADA

* Abstain Stake: 366 million ADA

* Yes Votes: 813 million ADA

Support = 813,055,842 ÷ (2.6 billion − 366,069,606)

Result:

**Yes:** 37.1%

**No / Not Voted:** 62.9%

In this example, the 62.9% figure includes both explicit "No" votes and participating stake that has not been used to vote on that particular proposal.

Consider a DRep with substantial voting power who has reviewed and voted on only a handful of proposals so far.

They may fully intend to return and complete the remaining votes before voting closes on June 12. However, until they do, their stake is already counted as participating stake and can influence the apparent support levels of every proposal they have not yet voted on. This can make proposals appear to have lower support than the DRep actually intends.

If a DRep has no position on a proposal, or does not wish to support or oppose it, recording an **Abstain** vote is the most accurate way to represent that intent. Abstaining removes that stake from the support calculation for that proposal, helping ensure that results reflect actual voting intentions rather than incomplete ballots.

In short:

Yes = I support this proposal.

No = I oppose this proposal.

Abstain = I choose not to participate in this decision.

No vote recorded = Your stake remains part of participating stake and may affect the proposal's support percentage.

As voting continues, if you are a DRep, taking a few moments to record abstentions where appropriate can help ensure that proposal outcomes are represented as fairly and accurately as possible.

Contributors: Larisa McF, Intersect

It’s been a week of contrasts across the Cardano ecosystem.

Market conditions remain challenging, volatility continues to test conviction, and difficult conversations are taking place around sustainability, funding, and what it takes for projects, infrastructure providers, and contributors to continue building through uncertain conditions.

And yet, the ecosystem continues to move forward.

This week saw the van Rossem hard fork keep marching on, with the Preprod hard fork initiation governance action successfully ratified. Preprod is now scheduled to transition to Protocol Version 11 on June 10, bringing Cardano closer to mainnet deployment. It is an important reminder that while market cycles come and go, the work of improving the protocol continues.

Beyond governance and upgrades, there have also been valuable discussions throughout the community about what makes Cardano different.

One theme that continues to emerge is the importance of resilient, permissionless infrastructure. The ability for anyone to run a relay node, propagate transactions, access the blockchain directly, and participate without relying on a small number of infrastructure providers remains one of Cardano's defining characteristics.

Recent news from several projects has prompted broader reflection on sustainability across the ecosystem. Building useful products, maintaining infrastructure, operating stake pools, and supporting communities all carry real costs. Strong teams can only continue to deliver value if the environment allows them to operate sustainably.

As Cardano's governance systems mature and treasury-funded development becomes a larger part of the ecosystem, conversations about accountability, priorities, impact, and long-term value will become increasingly important. These discussions are healthy. They reflect an ecosystem beginning to grapple with the responsibilities that come with managing its own future.

Perhaps the biggest takeaway from this week is that Cardano continues to evolve. The challenge ahead is ensuring that innovation, sustainability, decentralization, and accountability continue to move forward together.

Governance actions are being debated. Infrastructure is being upgraded. Elections are being prepared. Funding decisions are being scrutinized. Community members are challenging assumptions and asking difficult questions.

As always, the future of Cardano will be shaped not by any single proposal, organization, or individual, but by the collective decisions of the people who continue to build, operate, secure, and participate in the network every day.

Contributors: Abhik N, Ian H, Larisa M, Intersect.

MCC open office hours

Join us on Monday, June 8 for MCC open office hours, hosted by the Membership & Community committee.

This session is an open opportunity for members to connect directly with the MCC, ask questions, share feedback, and discuss current priorities around membership, community engagement, and committee initiatives.

Set your reminder and join the conversation here:
https://x.com/i/spaces/1RJjppOaekwKw?s=20

What’s on next week:

Constitutional Committee elections 2026

There are regular CC Election Process AMA sessions scheduled every Tuesday throughout the upcoming CC elections. Times alternate weekly to accommodate different time zones. These sessions are open for anyone with questions about the role or needs help with technical resources.

Next session: Tuesday, June 9 2026, 0830-0930 UTC

Subscribe to the Luma Calendar

Intersect Virtual Hub

Reminder that the Intersect Virtual Hub is open 24/7 for members to use and organize their own meetings and events. If you would like to utilize the screen sharing features for presentations, an Intersect staff moderator can assist.
How to join the Virtual Hub guide on X

van Rossem hard fork

Now that progress towards the hard fork is in full swing, the Hard Fork Working Group meets every Tuesday and Thursday. Subscribe to the Luma calendar

Intersect Connect on X: Community X space

An X space hosted by @Intersectmbo on Tuesday 9 June 1530 UTC, open to community members to come and catch updates, ask questions, and chat with Intersect.  

That’s it for this week’s update. Thank you for reading. To learn more about Intersect’s work, explore our Knowledge Base, which provides detailed information on governance structures, committees, and funding.

Join the conversation on Discord, and follow us on Twitter (X) and LinkedIn to engage with fellow members, working groups, and the broader community. Subscribe to the public Google and Luma calendars.