# Scoped evidence packet — work first, no new account

One contribution, one optional bounded reference, one useful commissioning question. Copy the templates below into your own approved document or email workflow; link to existing work rather than rebuild a portfolio. A packet without a reference is valid. Stop if your existing website and email already do the job.

For a filled-in rehearsal, copy the fictional worked example (https://from.work/evidence-packet/): separate website and email versions, both without references, plus a destination-specific optional permission request. The owner decision records acceptance of commercial uncertainty without waiving empirical gates.

**Blank working aid, not a verified reference or validated product.** The owner selected this narrow, reversible next step after synthetic run 002. That simulation is not participant evidence; issue #6 (https://github.com/brookemitchell/professional-network/issues/6) remains open. These AI-assisted templates are preparation material, not human-authored member work or testimonials. No network, inbox, sending, tracking, identity check or secure storage is provided.

## Use safely

1. **Prepare privately.** Keep completed packets, referee replies, permissions and recipient details in your existing approved restricted tools—not Git, issues, AI chats or the browser demo. Use fictional material for rehearsal here. This change does not authorise outreach, recruitment or personal-data collection.
2. **Choose one shareable contribution.** Prefer an existing permitted public link and a short excerpt. A public URL is not permission to copy it. Omit client/participant identifiers, internal comments, access tokens, private document links, interview notes and culturally sensitive/community material. Redacting names alone may not prevent identification. If authority to share is unclear, omit the material; do not invent a replacement claim.
3. **Keep the reference optional.** Send a request only through an independently established contact route when separately authorised. Ask for the referee's own words, corrections or refusal. No reply means no permission. Permission for a named recipient does not permit website publication or forwarding. Keep the consent record separately; do not attach the private email thread or contact details as proof.
4. **Review the destination.** The whole outgoing packet must be permitted for that destination. For a website, omit the recipient-specific brief, private reference and contact information; publish only individually approved public material. For email, check the recipient and forwarding restrictions. Email and websites do not enforce confidentiality or prevent copying. If that risk is unacceptable, do not share.
5. **Maintain only what you control.** Date and version the contribution and packet. A changed contribution needs fresh reference approval. After withdrawal or expired permission, remove the statement from your website and future packets; notify known prior recipients not to rely on or reuse it. You cannot erase their downloads, inboxes, backups or search caches. An old exported packet does not prove current support.

No names, addresses or signatures are required in the blank artifact. Do not treat a source link, date, authorship declaration or reference as independently checked fact. Membership, introductions and invitations are not competence evidence. A useful question is not supplier approval, appointment or a guarantee of work.

## 1. Copyable one-page packet

Replace bracketed fields in your private copy. Delete unused fields and all instructions before any separately authorised sharing. Keep the boundary and reference status visible. An excerpt plus precise limitation is better than a generic capability claim.

Before sharing, check the destination and intended purpose, work rights, current reference scope/permission and all use restrictions (or omit the reference), and absence of private details. Only then replace `DRAFT — NOT FOR SHARING` with `REVIEWED FOR STATED DESTINATION — [date]`. This is your review record, not independent verification. Unresolved permission or privacy checks block sharing. Commercial unknowns such as fee or travel funding may remain explicitly labelled as questions in an exploratory email; they are not agreed terms or authority to start work.

```text
WORK / CONTRIBUTION PACKET
Packet version and prepared date: [version; YYYY-MM-DD]
Intended use: DRAFT — NOT FOR SHARING
Allowed destination: [specific recipient OR exact public page; none until reviewed]

WORK
Title and work version/date: [one project or artefact; date is a supplied claim]
Existing permitted source: [public URL, or “not shareable”; no private/tokenised link]
My contribution: [what I personally did; distinguish collaborators' work]
Inspectable evidence: [short permitted excerpt or exact section to inspect]
What this supports: [one bounded claim tied to that evidence]
What it does NOT establish: [outcome, capability or context not demonstrated]
Sharing basis: [own material/permission for this destination; otherwise omit]

REFERENCE — OPTIONAL
Status: NO REFERENCE SHARED
[Only after explicit approval, replace the status and add:
Approved attribution: the name/role or description the referee permits here
Relationship and observation: how they directly know this contribution
Bound scope: the exact work version and contribution they observed
Statement: their exact approved words, not a paraphrased or generated endorsement
Limits: what they did not observe or cannot attest to
Permission: this named recipient OR this public page; approved date; expiry if any
Approved purpose: the specific decision or use the referee has permitted
Use restrictions: all additional conditions, including forwarding/reuse limits
Last checked: date the scope and permission were checked before this sharing]

CONTRACT CONVERSATION — OMIT FROM A PUBLIC WORK PAGE
Brief / requirement: [one deliverable this contribution may inform]
Terms to confirm: [duration, availability, location/travel, fee or day rate,
GST/tax treatment, workload/expenses and commissioning authority; unknowns explicit]
Why relevant: [connection from the excerpt to this requirement, not a match score]
One next question: [what would resolve the most important uncertainty?]
Decision the answer changes: [explore a bounded scope / ask for other evidence / decline]
No-go condition: [mismatch or missing authority that would stop this conversation]

BOUNDARY
Prepared by the contributor, not independently verified. A scoped statement is
not a general endorsement, identity/authorship check or procurement approval.
Only the stated destination is permitted; please ask before further sharing.
Copies can persist after correction or withdrawal. Recheck current permission
and scope with the sender before relying on an older packet.
```

**Reference status rules:**

| What you actually have | What belongs in the outgoing packet |
|---|---|
| No request, no reply, declined request or pending permission | `NO REFERENCE SHARED`; no draft statement or explanation identifying the referee |
| Imported testimonial without explicit permission for this use and scope | Do not put it in the reference section; omit it from this minimal packet |
| Explicit approval for this work version, this named recipient and this purpose, with all use restrictions satisfied | `SCOPED STATEMENT — PERMITTED FOR NAMED RECIPIENT ONLY`, with the approved fields above; not for a public page or a different purpose |
| Explicit approval for this work version, an exact public page and this purpose, with all use restrictions satisfied | `SCOPED STATEMENT — PERMITTED FOR SPECIFIED PUBLIC PAGE`, with approved fields; no implication of unrestricted reuse |
| Changed contribution or purpose, incompatible use restrictions, expired permission, withdrawn statement or uncertain current permission | `NO CURRENT REFERENCE SHARED`; remove statement and attribution from the outgoing packet, seek fresh permission if appropriate |

Do not change “no reference” into “verified” after receiving an email. Authorship, identity, rights and truth remain separate questions. Do not silently broaden a private approval into public consent.

## 2. Optional referee request — recipient chooses the words and destination

This is a draft to copy, not a send button or public request link. The demo's local referee link cannot be emailed as a secure or working cross-browser request. Do not pre-fill praise on the referee's behalf. Refusal, correction or no reply has no penalty and is not evidence of poor performance.

```text
Subject: Optional, limited reference for [contribution / version]

Would you be comfortable describing only what you directly observed of my
contribution to [work and version]? The proposed use is [one named recipient
and purpose OR exact public page]. The permitted excerpt and my contribution
description are below. Please correct either if needed; no confidential records
or participant details are requested.

[Insert only material already permitted to be shared with this referee.]

If you want to respond, please use your own words for what you observed, our
working relationship, the exact contribution, and what you cannot attest to.
Please also choose what attribution, if any, I may use.

Permission is separate from writing a statement. Please explicitly choose:
- No permission to share (the default, including no reply).
- Permission for the named recipient and purpose above only, not a website.
- Permission for the exact public page above only, not other destinations.
Please specify any expiry or further limits. You may correct, decline or ask
me to withdraw the statement through this same established contact route.

I will not share a statement without your explicit approval, or reuse it for
a changed contribution without asking again. I can remove it from copies I
control and ask known recipients to stop relying on it, but cannot erase
copies, emails, backups or caches already held by others.
```

## 3. Existing email route — one question, not an application system

Use only for a separately authorised, appropriate conversation through your existing channel. No mailing list, tracking pixel, bulk invitation, new account or move to from.work is needed. Do not email a private or stale reference just because its old text is available.

```text
Subject: [Brief] — one relevant contribution and a scope question

For [specific requirement], this contribution may be relevant:
[Permitted existing work link or the reviewed short packet pasted below.]

I personally [bounded contribution]. It does not establish [important limit].
[Optional: paste the entire current, destination-approved REFERENCE section
and BOUNDARY from the packet, preserving scope, limits, permission, approved
purpose, all use restrictions and dates;
do not paste an isolated endorsement. Otherwise omit this line.]

Before discussing a contract, could you clarify [one evidence-linked question]?
That would help decide whether [bounded next step] is appropriate. I would not
proceed if [no-go condition]. [List only material unknown terms from the packet.]

This is an exploratory question, not an application, appointment, supplier
approval or commitment. Your existing commissioning process still applies.
Please ask before forwarding material beyond its stated permitted destination.
```

## Rehearse without collecting or sending anything

Use a made-up contribution: a blank handoff checklist that assigns a next-update owner, but provides no evidence of improved repair outcomes. Start with **no reference**, an unknown travel budget and a question about who will test the handoff. A conversation can still be worth considering; do not fill the gap with a fictional endorsement presented as real.

Try four decisions in a disposable fictional copy: (1) no referee reply → no statement; (2) named-recipient-only permission → exclude from website; (3) changed contribution or withdrawal → remove old statement; (4) a fee/travel or authority mismatch → decline rather than imply a match. Do not send the rehearsal or enter real details. A template can prompt review; it cannot enforce permission, authenticate a referee or recall copies.

Also try permission for fictional recipient X to evaluate discovery brief A, with “no onward forwarding.” Carry the recipient, purpose and restriction into the reference section and email. The same recipient evaluating brief B is a different purpose: omit the statement until fresh permission is obtained. An unanswered travel-budget question may be asked without implying funded travel; unanswered permission may not be treated as consent.

For any later issue #6 study, do not show this packet before the unexposed B0 interview. The current guides and real-study readiness gates remain unchanged; a new stimulus needs a separately approved protocol version. This artifact neither recruits participants nor satisfies empirical thresholds. No claim of human usability, demand, privacy compliance or hiring success follows from its existence.