PRO-UK campaigners have been warned not to "undermine Scotland" by veterans of the fight to keep Quebec in Canada.
Senior figures in the victorious campaigns against sovereignty for the French-speaking province believe their British counterparts are risking defeat by being overwhelmingly negative.
Some, The Herald understands, have passed their concerns on to Scottish Unionist politicians.
They include Dennis Dawson, a Canadian liberal senator and major player in the independence referendums of 1980 and 1995. Mr Dawson said he had met Better Together figures over wine during parliament exchanges.
"I told them 'Don't undermine Scotland'," he said. "Scotland could be independent as much as the other 180 countries in the UN. But does it need to be?
"You can't say that Scotland does not have the economic force to be independent. That is the wrong thing to say.
"Nobody can prove an independent Scotland would be more prosperous. But nobody can prove it would be in economic turmoil either."
Mr Dawson believes the danger in his country - and his province - was always running down Quebec, risking a backlash from voters.
He said: "It is quite clear the biggest risk that the No side have always taken in Canada was to oversimplify the negative aspects of independence.
"The 'No' does have much more choice than having the negative campaign because you are asking people to vote No to something. But you can have campaign that is oriented on the fact that Canada offers more opportunities than problems.
"But people like the status quo. So if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Better Together has always denied that it is exclusively negative - and dismissed claims its pro-independence opponents are more positive.
In recent weeks the UK Government has issued stark warnings about the future of the Scottish economy while one prominent Labour ex-minister, George Robertson said independence would be "cataclysmic" for the entire western world.
The pro-UK movement, meanwhile, has sought to learn from Canada, recently adopting the slogan No Thanks, thought to have been inspired by Quebec's "Non Merci" of 1995, and studying last-ditch efforts by Anglophones in neighbouring to "lovebomb" the would-be breakaway province.
Edward Goldenberg, chief of staff to Jean Chretien, Canada's prime minister during the 1995 referendum, stressed the need to strike an emotional as well as a rational chord.
He said: "In 1980 the No camp talked a great deal about the advantages of Canada and the victory was 60-40. In 1995 there was less talk about the advantages of being Canadian and more about the economics and the result was closer. If the No side abdicates the heart, it will be more problematic to win."
Michael Keating, head of the Future of the UK and Scotland programme run by the Economic and Social Research Council, is a seasoned watcher of independence politics on both sides of the Atlantic.
He reckons Better Together and their allies are aware of the dangers of the kind of negative messages highlighted in Canada nearly two decades ago.
"The No camp have known this all along," he said. "They just keep forgetting. They should also learn that lovebombing from England doesn't work either. Any campaign has to be won in Scotland.
"The Canadians organised a big Unity rally in Montreal in the last days of the 1995 referendum. People may not have cared about it but it could have backfired."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article