Archive · Tranche 2

The public language sheet — what we were allowed to say

A binding, one-page standard for everyone speaking on behalf of the project: the phrases that were forbidden, the phrases to use instead, and what to say when someone asked a question the project could not answer.

Original title
Public Language Sheet
Original date
20 May 2026
Project phase
Stage 1 — governance formation
Purpose at the time
Make message discipline a written standard rather than a shared instinct, so that a dozen volunteers talking to neighbours all said the same defensible thing.
Status at the time
Adopted by the steering committee as a binding standard for all members and anyone communicating on behalf of the project.
Source provenance
Derived from internal/steering_pack/05_public_language_sheet.md (private working corpus; unpublished, unchanged).
Publication treatment
Substantially intact
Derived / prepared by
Claude (Fable 5) with Adrian Wedd, 18 August 2026
Prepared
2026-08-18
Human review
Adrian Wedd — publication review completed 19 August 2026
Published
2026-08-19
What was changed for publication
  • Published substantially intact.
  • One line in the word-swap table — avoid "pledge", use "expression of interest" — was later overtaken by the project itself, which launched a public pledge form in June 2026 after the language had been reviewed for that purpose. The sheet is left as adopted on 20 May 2026; the change is in the changelog rather than backdated into the standard.
  • This is the most directly reusable document in the archive. Another community group could adopt it, changing only the property and jurisdiction.
  • The 'say this instead' column is the part that made it work. A prohibition list alone leaves a volunteer silent in front of a neighbour; a substitution list lets them keep talking.

Document begins

Public Language Reference Sheet

Bottom Pub Co-op — Steering Committee & Volunteers

Internal reference | Binding on all steering committee members from adoption | v1.0


This sheet is the vocabulary standard for every public conversation, email, social media post, meeting handout, and media comment made on behalf of this project.

If you are not sure whether something is OK to say, do not say it. Refer to the convenor.


Say this / Not that

Project stage and intent

Say thisNot thatWhy
”We are exploring whether community ownership of the Commercial Hotel is worth pursuing.""We are acquiring the pub.” / “We are buying the pub.”We have no legal capacity to buy anything yet. We have not verified the property is available.
”We are at Stage 1 — gauging community interest and testing feasibility.""The project is underway.” / “We’ve started the process.""Underway” implies commitment we have not made.
”We’ve formed a steering committee to research the options.""We’ve formed a buying group.” / “We’re moving forward with the purchase.”We are researching options. No purchase has been decided.
”We’re testing whether this is financially and legally feasible.""We know it can work.” / “The numbers stack up.”Feasibility has not been established. Unverified numbers exist but have not been modelled or reviewed.
”We’ll make a decision about whether to proceed once we have the information we need.""We’ve decided to do this.” / “We’re committed to saving the pub.”No go/no-go decision has been made.

Property status

Say thisNot thatWhy
”The property is currently in a receivership process.""The pub is for sale.” / “The pub is on the market.”[ASSUMPTION — the receivership is confirmed internally, but has not been publicly verified from an official record. Do not state the property is for sale until it is publicly listed or we have confirmed the process with the receiver.]
”We are exploring whether the community can participate in whatever process is underway.""We’ve been told the price is $X.” / “We expect to pay around $X.”Price figures are meeting-reported and unverified. Do not repeat them publicly.
”We do not know yet whether the property would be available to a community group on terms that work.""The receiver wants to sell to us.” / “We have first right of refusal.”There is no indication the receiver has any preference for a community buyer. Do not imply otherwise.

Community interest and membership

Say thisNot thatWhy
”Over 68 people have registered their interest in being kept informed.""68 people have pledged support.” / “68 investors are ready.”EOI responses are expressions of interest in receiving information — not commitments of money or support.
”We’re inviting people to stay informed about the project as it develops.""We’re inviting people to invest.” / “We’re taking pledges.”We are not currently raising capital. We have no legal vehicle to receive investment.
”If the project reaches a stage where membership or capital options are proposed, they will be presented legally and transparently.""Membership will cost $X.” / “Shares will be $X.”No membership terms have been designed or approved.
”This is a community exploration, not a commercial offer.""This is an investment opportunity.""Investment opportunity” has legal implications and is not accurate at this stage.

Money, returns, and finances

Say thisNot thatWhy
”We are modelling the financial feasibility — no conclusions have been reached.""The pub will be profitable.” / “Members will receive returns.”Feasibility has not been established. No returns of any kind have been modelled or approved.
”Any financial structure would be subject to legal advice, feasibility analysis, and community approval.""We’re planning to pay a 5% return.” / “You’ll get your money back in X years.”Return promises are not ours to make and may be legally regulated.
”We’re exploring what capital instruments might be available under co-operative law, subject to legal advice.""You can buy a share for $X.” / “Debentures will pay X%.”No capital instruments have been designed or legally reviewed.
”The figures we’re working with are unverified estimates from early community discussions.""The renovation will cost $900K.” / “The purchase price will be around $1.3M.”[ASSUMPTION — these figures are meeting-reported and not independently verified. Do not quote them publicly as facts.]

Timelines

Say thisNot thatWhy
”We don’t have a timeline to share yet — it depends on information we’re still gathering.""We expect to open by [date].” / “We’ll make a decision by [month].”We have no control over the property process timeline and cannot predict our own.
”The property process has its own timeline that we are not in control of.""We have time to get organised.” / “There’s no urgency.”There may be considerable urgency — the receiver’s process may move faster than we can.
”We’re working as quickly as we responsibly can.""This could take years.”We don’t know. Unnecessary discouragement is as misleading as false confidence.

Community ownership model

Say thisNot thatWhy
”A community co-operative model — where members share governance, not just investment.""A co-op is like a syndicate.” / “It’s like crowdfunding the pub.”Syndicate and crowdfunding imply financial structures we have not designed.
”Members of a co-op have a say in how it is run — democratic governance is central to the model.""Members will own a share of the property.”Membership rights depend on the legal structure, which has not been chosen.
”Subject to legal advice, co-operative law may allow members to contribute capital — but the terms are unknown at this stage.""You can own a piece of the pub for $500.”This is not decided, not approved, and not yet legally designed.

Quick-reference word swaps

AvoidUse instead
PledgeExpression of interest
Investment / investorMembership / member (once legally defined)
Dividend / returnNot yet applicable — do not use
GuaranteedNot yet applicable — do not use
Acquisition / acquireExploring / feasibility
Buying groupSteering committee / community group
We willWe are exploring whether
It will workFeasibility is being assessed
The price isFigures we’ve heard, unverified, are

If a journalist asks

Refer to the convenor. Do not speculate. The one thing every member may say:

“The Cygnet community is exploring whether cooperative ownership of the Commercial Hotel is worth pursuing. We’ve formed a steering committee to look at the options, and we’ll be keeping the community informed as we learn more.”

That is the whole story at Stage 1. Nothing more.

End of document ← Back to the archive