Every way a person can act in the commons and the intranet, written as capability sentences: what someone can do, how it is proven, and what its standing honestly is. One set per persona, walking the participation index from the door inward, with refusals counted as capabilities, because what the system will not do is half of what it promises. Each arrival class opens with its day one passage: what a person actually does in a first sitting, in the order they would do it, and where the sequence stops.1
The register is the PRD's: a capability is a member sentence, and each story below carries its proving act in the manner of a piece's acceptance.2 Personas follow the classes of the participation index, extended by the guild, the cooperative's emergent virtual way in; the rehearsal walks the newcomer, the host, and the steward in CI, with the unsigned stranger probed across every table; class-scoped personas are not among them yet, and this set is written so the guild and community personas can join when P-03 lands.3 Story numbers here are document-local for conversation, not Almanac addresses; only the Almanac mints addresses.
Each of the five arrival classes opens with a day one passage before its stories: plain narrative, first sitting, in order, and then the stop, which is the sentence naming where the sequence refuses and what it waits on. The passage claims nothing the stories below do not carry, and where a step is broken today rather than merely unbuilt, it says so in the same voice. A register that narrates only intentions is a brochure.
What this frame leaves out, deliberately: the hub's physical life (doors, desks, keys are not the record's to promise), governance meetings and voting (held under the Bylaws, not yet carried by any surface), and Class Four, which has neither a surface nor, on the legal shelf, an instrument: the Investor Agreement is still to be drafted, and a class the record cannot yet bind is a class this register will not narrate. Left out too is anything marked proposed, which stands before the board and binds nobody. Section B stands there entire: the guild waits on the board's adoption of GUILD v0.1 and on two elections, GUILD-D2, the invitation count, and GUILD-D5, the public name. Statuses shown are as of August 2026 and follow the Almanac; where a story waits, the chip names what it waits on.
No account, no class, no obligations. The system's first promises are made to people it does not know.
A stranger arrives holding nothing and can read everything that would bind them: the participation index, the whole legal shelf, and the commons pages, all of it rendering without a sign-in (A-1). If they decide, they apply at the front door in one sitting, with no account, no meeting, and nobody's help, and the application, the membership state, and the event land as a single act (A-2). Within moments the steward hears it on the notices rail (A-3).
Where it stops: nothing comes back to them. The acknowledgment to the applicant's own inbox waits on the mail seam clearing DNS (A-4), so from where the applicant stands, the first thing the cooperative does is go quiet. The gap is named in the steward's notice rather than swallowed, which is honest, and it is still silence.
The guild is the cooperative's emergent virtual extension: the workshop reaching past one address to hold emergent projects at the intersection of art, craft, and science, in service of the public benefit the Articles name. An open tent with a deliberate starting edge, technologist and technology-adjacent art and craft, because that is where infrastructure and architecture bound by economic democracy get built first. What follows is that purpose expressed as machinery. Every story in it is proposed: it stands before the board with GUILD v0.1 and binds nobody until adoption, and it is written here so the promise and the machinery can be reviewed as one thing.4
A person anywhere reads the Guild Participation Terms in plain language and signs them inline, the signature landing as an event (B-2, waiting on P-01). They choose a monthly amount they can carry, from ten to two hundred dollars, and complete enrollment in one sitting, with no surface anywhere distinguishing them by what they chose (B-1, waiting on P-02). They land in the directory holding a profile only they control (B-3), browse gatherings and register wherever a host stands a virtual door (B-4), and put the first piece of work on the board the same day, as play, practice, or work (B-5), where any bound participant can respond to them (B-6). Over the months that follow they can see their own path as a self-facing tally, never a ranking (B-7, waiting on P-04).
Where it stops, and this one is worse than waiting: the participation index today invites a reader to join the guild and hands them to a way the front door does not carry, so the very first step of this sequence refuses without saying so, on the live site. Until the board adopts and P-02 builds the fifth way, the honest guild day one is that it cannot begin. Naming that is this register's job; the remedy is either the fifth way or withdrawing the invitation until it exists.
A second thing to see before adoption: every commons policy keys on an active membership, not on a class. So what a guild participant reads on the day they enroll turns on how enrollment writes their membership and on the class question P-03 holds open, which is the same open cell B-10 declines to guess. The commons from day one is a policy decision nobody has recorded yet, and no amount of drafting here records it.
The hub's open edge. The room itself is outside the record's promises; the commons stories are the same ones the guild will share.
A community participant comes through the same front door as everyone else and enrolls in one sitting, the application landing as an event like any other (A-2). Once a steward binds them, the commons opens: a profile in the directory that they alone control, the gatherings calendar, and the board, the same capabilities the guild stories name one section above (C-2).
Where it stops, twice: the level they are enrolling at, Threshold, Footing, or Standing, is not on the surface, so enrollment lands without a level and a steward carries it out of band until the level machinery is built (C-1). And no class-scoped persona has walked any of this in the rehearsal, so what a community participant can do is inferred from the member's walk rather than proven on their own, until P-03 lands (C-2, C-4).
A desk, a signed agreement, and a trail of credits toward conversion. The counting itself waits on the counting rules, and the stories say so.
A co-working participant's first sitting is a signature. They read the Hub Participation Agreement on the shelf, sign it inline, and the execution date anchors the patronage clock from that moment (D-1). The desk itself, the door, the key, the hours, is the hub's business and never the record's (C-3); what the record does from that day is count.
Where it stops: the counting has no rates yet, so credits accrue and the tally cannot be shown until the Q3 counting rules give contributions their values (D-2), and the invitation threshold that reads from that same tally waits with it (D-3). And the instrument is not where the shelf implies: the personal shelf carries one signable contract row titled Hub Membership Agreement, marked provisional in its seed and pointing at the Membership Agreement's page, while the legal shelf marks the same instrument drafted, under counsel review, and not yet published, and the Participation Framework names it as still to be drafted for both classes it governs. The signing machinery is live. The instrument this class signs is not yet its own. Since 2026-08-12 the instrument is named the Hub Participation Agreement on every authored surface, the access track having given up the word member at the steward's direction; the CIS row still reads Hub Membership Agreement, because migration 0011 is emitted and history is not editable, and it will be renamed by a migration of its own rather than by an edit.
Ownership, and the fullest set. Where a right exists on paper but its surface waits, the chip says which condition it waits on.
A member's first sitting is the fullest one in the estate. An invited person signs the Membership Agreement inline, pays the one-time share, and watches the capital account open at one hundred dollars as a view over events rather than a stored balance (E-1, E-2). The member-scoped commons opens whole in the same session: the directory, the calendar, the board, and the responses that concern them (E-3). They can stand a gathering that day (E-4), read the Desk's governance record of every movement the rules care about (E-5) and the Programs view with each Program's purpose, Coordinator, and policy standing (E-6), and use the one act nobody else in the estate holds: give the instrument work as a recorded act, with a brief, a kind, and a scope, and watch its arc to acceptance or refusal on the record (E-10).
Where it stops: the two acts a new member reaches for soonest are both proposed. Standing as the carrier of a body of work waits on the standing module and P-05 (E-9), and inviting someone along the access track waits on the invitation count and P-04 (E-8). The tallies that make ownership legible, patronage and the distributive share, wait on the Q3 counting rules (E-7), so a member can see that the account opened and not yet what it has earned.
Nobody simply is an authority; each of these is a dated row in the grants, revocable, and probed.
Nou's stories are mostly refusals, which is the design working.
A project is the day one word for a body of work someone brings: a thing with a shape, a person behind it, and no standing yet. The record holds no object by that name and never will, which is a decision and not an omission. This section says who can do what about a project today, class by class, without inventing one.5
Someone with a project in hand does the same first thing at every class that can do it at all: they post it to the board as play, practice, or work, say what they are looking for, and let people respond. Nothing is designated, nothing is named a project in the database, and nothing about their standing changes. If the work goes somewhere, standing arrives later and by adoption, never by the act of posting.
Where it stops: today only a cooperative member can do it, because the board is scoped to an active membership. The guild's version of this act is the piece of the guild people will feel first, and it is proposed (B-5). The carrier act, which is how a person's name attaches to a body of work, is proposed too (E-9). So on the estate as it stands, sharing a project is a member's capability and nobody else's.
The promises that do not vary by persona, which is why they come last and bind everything above.