SAKMC

[magentus]

Mmmmmmmmmmm donuts.

[zoidberg]

New page banana man dance.        

[twiliter]

Fellow SAKMC Units, I have some news. I am going to have to quit this club that I co-founded at the end of the month in order to take my place in the 30 day minimal challenge set by Hiraethus ; http://forum.multitool.org/index.php/topic,68346.0.html I will need to carry my Wenger SI for this and so sadly my beloved Pikachu will be put out to pasture for a while.

During my time here I have greatly enjoyed the camaraderie between us merry Units and I hope you won't judge me too harshly for my decision. I may even see Twiliter on the challenge, and I hope you won't banish me from your realm your Royal Unit.

Please let me know whether it's best for me to leave quietly now I've made my announcement, or stay on for the rest of the month.

Yours sincerely, Unit 2.

Maybe there should be a time limit for membership, say 60 days or so. Then SAKMCers could switch carry for a time, say 30 days or so, then return to the club refreshed, and continue on with the monogamy, possibly even with a different model, as long as the 60 day limit has been returned to? Like a 60/30 clause or something? Could work, but would have to meet approval of members with majority vote of course, SAKMC is a democratic group after all...

Some badge quests could be embarked on by members with the 60/30 clause, as well as interesting and fun challenges like the upcoming one. I was considering entering Hiraethus' challenge myself and undecided as yet, but would most certainly vote yea for such a clause to put into the bylaws.

Day 129 for the PX-D, with my green Compact, which would be a good choice for a 2 layer challenge (scissors). Then again, Ellie could use some pocket time too. But then again, the PX-D has the best of both... 

[twiliter]

Really can't do the challenge now that I think about it, it's nice to not have to decide what to carry. Sticking with Unit 3 fellas, till further notice. 

[Steinar]

Maybe there should be a time limit for membership, say 60 days or so. Then SAKMCers could switch carry for a time, say 30 days or so, then return to the club refreshed, and continue on with the monogamy, possibly even with a different model, as long as the 60 day limit has been returned to? Like a 60/30 clause or something? Could work, but would have to meet approval of members with majority vote of course, SAKMC is a democratic group after all...

I really would disapprove if my wife suggested that definition of monogamy to me... 

[magentus]

Maybe there should be a time limit for membership, say 60 days or so. Then SAKMCers could switch carry for a time, say 30 days or so, then return to the club refreshed, and continue on with the monogamy, possibly even with a different model, as long as the 60 day limit has been returned to? Like a 60/30 clause or something? Could work, but would have to meet approval of members with majority vote of course, SAKMC is a democratic group after all...

I really would disapprove if my wife suggested that definition of monogamy to me... 

I agree with you Steiner. Monogamy is an absolute surely? I'm having second thoughts now anyway. I will have to consult the Universe........

[firiki]

If you only ever carry a SAK once, does that still count as monogamy?

[twiliter]

I agree with you Steiner. Monogamy is an absolute surely? I'm having second thoughts now anyway. I will have to consult the Universe........

Indeed, that perspective helps so...

Nevermind! 

  Thanks Steinar!

[Steinar]

Happy to keep you maniacs on the straight and narrow!   

[twiliter]

Happy to keep you maniacs on the straight and narrow!   

Even those of us who participate in monogamy need a reminder sometimes of what it truly means. Unit 3 is grateful. 

Hope Mags makes a decision soon, hearing Pikachu weep is so sad... 

[twiliter]

My PX-D gave me a little snap on the finger with her scissors this morning, I know now it was for considering entering the challenge. Lucky she didn't do worse, that blade is wicked! 

[ducttapetech]

So how long do you have to carry the same SAK before you join back?

[firiki]

^^ It depends, I guess. If it were up to me to decide, you'd have to stay SAK-less if you lost your SAKMC SAK. 
 
This ain't no SAKPC thread, you know

[magentus]

So how long do you have to carry the same SAK before you join back?

This is under discussion at the moment - we haven't thought it through. 

[ducttapetech]

Well, is the SAK leaving you? If that is the case and you happened to find a new love (SAK), you should be good because you are staying true to one SAK. And say the previous SAK decided that it messed up and wants to come back and you take it back and you live happily ever after, it is still monogamy right? You were still true to one SAK at time.

[twiliter]

Good point Nate, throws another wrench in the works dunnit...

 

[magentus]

Anyone who seriously wants to set up some guidelines for membership to the SAKMC please feel free - I could use some help and as usual I want to have my cake and eat it.

[twiliter]

Here is the oath you authored Mags, I hesitate to break from it, or even try to decipher it. >> "Do you solemnly swear to stay faithful to your (insert name of SAK here) forever forth lest doth you both whereinto hereafter?"

This can be a starting point for the guideline proceedings, this being a historical and founding statement. 

[twiliter]

Where is Mon anyway, we are directionless without him. 

[magentus]

Where is Mon anyway, we are directionless without him. 

I know! We need the Royal Unit.

Do you solemnly swear to stay faithful to your (insert name of SAK here) forever forth lest doth you both whereinto hereafter?

Well, that's clear isn't it?

[ducttapetech]

It's more of a guide line.

[magentus]

I'd like to see a lawyer pick apart 'forever forth lest doth you both whereinto hereafter'. That's just nonsense! Seems open to abuse if you ask me.

[Poncho65]

[twiliter]

I'd like to see a lawyer pick apart 'forever forth lest doth you both whereinto hereafter'. That's just nonsense! Seems open to abuse if you ask me.

Given that I would like you to have your cake and eat it too, I think maybe a rewrite is called for before we have it chiseled over the castle gates. 

[magentus]

How about 'An it harm none, do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law'?  Sounds a bit familiar, but I'm sure nothing can go wrong with that. Pretty ironclad if you ask me.

[ducttapetech]

I'd like to see a lawyer pick apart 'forever forth lest doth you both whereinto hereafter'. That's just nonsense! Seems open to abuse if you ask me.

Given that I would like you to have your cake and eat it too, I think maybe a rewrite is called for before we have it chiseled over the castle gates. 

Good idea. If you guys can't figure it out, you and join us and serve Chaos or join the Darkside. Both are very diverse groups and don't judge much.

[Poncho65]

 

 

[ducttapetech]

Sounds a bit Golden Dawnish to me. 

[twiliter]

Outstanding bit of legalese there, we'll have to get approval from Mon, he will insist on the final say I'm sure. 

[ducttapetech]

The way that is written, you don't need approval at all.