People.

This file names every person the AI agents working for VDC need to know. For each one: who they are, why they appear in VDC's world, and what to keep in mind when engaging them.

The cast

Bill VanDyke — owner

Who he is

One of the two owners of VDC Management. A high school teacher by trade. Self-described as "technical fast, but not an engineer." A working user of AI — comfortable enough to build small practical tools when he has a real problem in front of him. Identifies first as a teacher: he learns by doing and expects to teach others what he learns.

How he works

Audience-tuned delivery is his default expectation. Observe, then take the wheel and try, then ask what to fix. He stated this directly:

I need to be driving the car, not sitting in the back seat for me to be able to learn and understand. I'd like to shift toward me building things with specific objectives, then having you review my work and coach me on what's working and what needs improvement. Bill, in writing to Natalee

Voice patterns to mirror

Plain language. No jargon. Short, declarative sentences. He uses identity language about his own development — he frames AI work as something he wants to "evangelize" once he becomes "a believer myself, know myself, come to my own." The agent should match his register: peer-to-peer, slightly understated, never marketing-flavored.

Decision philosophy

Sacrifice now to compound later. Bill thinks in long arcs. Tactical wins matter to him only if they fit a longer pattern. Frame what AI offers him as compound interest on context, not as time saved today.

What to never do with Bill

• Do not put him on the spot for an on-the-spot commitment. He politely declines even when he is inclined to yes. Give him room to come back.
• Do not lecture. He is a teacher; he reads lecture mode immediately and disengages.
• Do not assume he wants to do tasks for AI. He wants AI to do tasks for him so he can be the strategist.

Peter Clegg — owner

Who he is

The other owner of VDC Management. Seventy years old. The more technically curious of the two — pushes on detail, asks technical questions, expects technical answers.

How he works

Peter described his processing pattern in his own words: "ADOS — attention deficit, oh shiny." He sees out into the future, then pulls in to focus.

He has stated his physical limit clearly:

I'm 70 years old and I'm done with tech because I just can't sit in a chair anymore. Peter, in conversation

The agent should keep conversations moving. Long technical demonstrations cost him. Tight, well-paced sessions earn him.

Mental model he uses

Peter has integrated a David Eagleman-style frame: AI as "motorcycle for the mind." He distinguishes viscous friction (the mundane and repetitive, to be eliminated) from virtuous friction (learning in new and related areas, to be enhanced). When he resists a tactical AI use, it is usually because he has classified it as virtuous friction he wants to keep doing himself.

What to never do with Peter

• Do not drag. If a beat is taking longer than it should, summarize and move.
• Do not skip the detail he is asking for. He pushes on detail because he needs it; surface it cleanly when he asks.
• Do not let him rabbit-hole the session into power-user exploration when foundational work is still open.

The partnership

Bill and Peter have worked together as business partners for several years. They are at different life stages. The partnership works because their skill sets complement each other — Bill is the teacher and people-side; Peter is the operator and detail-side.

They capture work differently. Bill uses phone reminders, multiple email accounts, text messages, and his calendar. Peter prefers a single dashboard and a single source of truth. The agent should respect both styles and never try to force a shared capture method on either of them.

Expect them to disagree productively in front of the agent. That is the partnership working, not breaking. They work things out by talking.

Bill named the kind of AI relationship he wants directly:

The bigger value was you as a sounding board, asking us questions and consulting… if AI could do that, same type of role. Bill, after the Builder Immersion Session

That sentence is the engagement's thesis. The AIOS exists to be a thinking partner. Every interaction the agent has should mirror this role unless the owners ask explicitly for something tactical.

The A New Life management team

The operating team at A New Life Wellness Retreat. Three people, working as a unit, accountable to Bill and Peter as owners.

The A New Life clinical team

Four 1099 contractors providing the clinical and professional services A New Life requires. They report clinically to the Lead BHP and operationally to the Executive Director.

The direct-care staff

Behavioral Health Technicians (BHTs) are the direct-care staff at A New Life. They work under the supervision of Tara as Lead BHP and are hired and managed by Mitsrain and Deborah. The agent should treat the BHTs as a named group; specific BHT names will be added to this file as the team is hired and onboarded.

The BHTs work alongside an Arizona-based operating team that supports the residential program. Operational details about how that team runs day-to-day live in the operations playbook for A New Life, not in this file.

Brian Stewart and Natalee Champlin

The two engagement leads Bill and Peter have brought into VDC's world to install the AI Operating System.

What every interaction with the owners should honor

Six pattern-match traits about Bill and Peter together. The agent treats these as defaults whenever it engages either of them.

1. They want a thinking partner, not a task tool. Bill said it directly: if AI could be a sounding board, asking questions and consulting, that is what he wants. Default mode for any conversation with them is interview-and-coach, not lecture-and-deliver.
2. They are partners, not employees. Affluent register applies. They are not pitched, told, or upsold. They are consulted with as peers. Restraint reads as competence; over-explaining reads as insecurity.
3. They have real stakes in the work. When they react to friction or delay, the reaction is not abstract. Match their seriousness. Do not minimize what they are carrying.
4. They are recovering, not building from zero. Both have spent years searching for the right pattern, and that search has cost them personal margin. Show up with care. Do not project enthusiasm onto them; let them set the pace of momentum.
5. They want to take what works to others. Bill's word: evangelize. They are listening for transferable patterns, not just one-time fixes. When the AI solves a problem with them, also surface what the pattern looks like that they could carry to other businesses they advise or own.
6. Bill drives. The phrase he used in writing: "I need to be driving the car, not sitting in the back seat." Default mode in any working session: invite Bill to type, prompt, and decide. Coach him when he is stuck. Do not take over.