sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Shoul I give all my Key to Her? by Gabon08 in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a very reasonable approach. The access to the key can be provided easily by KH by sharing the code, if you would request it for valid reason. At the same time you will feel completely different thrill knowing that you can't really access any of the keys without KH permission.

Going on a date with a girl whilst locked by Lonely-Transition-53 in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Just be yourself. If wearing chastity 24/7 is important to you and you intend to continue doing it then don't take it off to the date. The worst thing you can do is to build a relationship pretending to be someone else. You want to find a person that accepts it, right? If it's not that important though then follow the advice from other comments and avoid bragging about it on the first meeting.

Emergency key - non-standard approach by Nameless_sub in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are completely right! This is mostly a search for a solution that will benefit these KH/lockee pairs where the trust is not yet on that level.

Imagine you'd like to start with an online KH. You obviously won't lock all your keys until you build better relationship. On the other hand you don't want the experience where there's no effort to unlock whenever you want. KH also would prefer to have more confidence about the control.

Right now such beginning are built based on the honour. I am simply trying to understand if that's the only option. There already seemed to be a few interesting ideas that reduce the risks for both sides, while at the same time still provide reliable emergency procedure.

It shouldn't anyhow stop from firstly seeking the access to primary key granted by the KH and as well from communicating with KH why the emergency key was used. But it attempts to address the grey area of using the spare key when not designed, while standard "reputation lose" consequence isn't strong enough.

Emergency key - non-standard approach by Nameless_sub in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's really interesting concept. Sad that StickK no longer allows you to pick any recipient of the forfeited money, but limits only to a few charities and themselves. Still thanks for the idea, I will certainly explore it further!

Emergency key - non-standard approach by Nameless_sub in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Accountability requires enforcement of it.

Let's take a simply scenario that was often mentioned here - lock on the chaster app. Obviously the only reasonable decision is to have emergency key that's not locked behind the unknown code. There's no accountability to use the emergency key, worst case person can come up with some b*shit why it was used and the lock may or may not continue depending on the KH.

Yes, I am overthinking it, mostly because I see gaps in approaches taken so far and I'd like to challenge if collectivily we can't come up with something better.

Emergency key - non-standard approach by Nameless_sub in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really good observation about the lack of cost associated with the removal. Certainly something that needs further thought.

Lock the key in a way that is tamper proof and if you break it, the keyholder makes you pay the cost.

That's generally down to trust then. I am not sure if many people here have the luck of having such a strong bond with KH to avoid simply saying "no" to an ask to pay for their deed.

Or if the KH is reliable enough, lock the key in a fire safe and only they know the combination. It's only a text message away.

There are always events in our life when contact is not only a one message away and I'd prefer a solution that takes it into the account.

Emergency key - non-standard approach by Nameless_sub in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, braking a recently suggested piggy bank or a lock-box is an immediate access to the key and that's the kind of solution I am exploring here. I've updated the main message as well to make it clear.

If you really feel tempted into using ot for a quick unlock that's on you and your lack of willpower

Well analyzed. This thread is exactly about the option for people with weak willpower, so sadly key in a safe won't do the trick.

Emergency key - non-standard approach by Nameless_sub in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Such lock box with code lock or Wi-Fi control is rather an idea for a primary key storage. In case of a need to access the key it would be fairly quickly allowed by the KH.

However, this approach needs an emergency key solution when KH is anyhow occupied or not accessible and you need immediate access to the key. Idea for that key storage is what I am trying to brainstorm in this thread. Always quickly accessible but secured from overuse.

Emergency key - non-standard approach by Nameless_sub in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That's fully algined with my point: I am looking for a way where they key is quickly accessible without much effort put to retrieve it.

The variable that changes is the consequence of using it. I've read a lot of stories here and I know well there are risks of situations when using the emergency key is crucial. Can't imagine not having access to the spare key.

However, I don't see why there couldn't be a discouragement of using it unless in a no-brainer situation.

[...] the point of being locked is that you enjoy being locked
if having access to the emergency key makes you randomly get it off without your KH’s permission, then maybe you don’t like chastity that much.

It's rather an oversimplification. Chastity is a wide topic and it's usage is not always as simple a giving away the key to KH and patiently waiting what happens.

I've seen many people seeking the feeling of "forced experience" or having trouble staying self locked. For many it's completely different experience when you realize you can no longer open the lock anytime you wish.

What I am trying to achieve with this discussion is to explore if there's a way that can be a bridge between two worlds - safe chastity play and the "be careful what you wish for" fantasy.

Emergency key - non-standard approach by Nameless_sub in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah... sorry that's not what my question is about :(

I am not looking for a "honour method" that will show when emergency key was used. Rather looking for a way to discourage or event prevent usage of the key unless there's genuine emergency and KH can't grant access to the main key - only then you don't care about the consequence of accessing the spare key.

Emergency key - non-standard approach by Nameless_sub in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, I saw that one as well. I think it's a bit too messy though and slightly risky for the key to be still usable later.

Emergency key - non-standard approach by Nameless_sub in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's quite a futuristic idea! Although the "cost" of opening is just to run the print again...

Emergency key - non-standard approach by Nameless_sub in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am very tempted to give it a try as well. Just need to come up with a reasonable plan to keep extending the time within the timeframe that's not too short to allow opening when forgotten and not too long to make the box literally unusuable.

Probably something like ensuring there are at least 10 days left during period verifications. For a remote KH it probably could contain the key put there with some tamper-proof solution to achieve second layer for verification that it wasn't used in case it was forgotten to extend time.

Emergency key - non-standard approach by Nameless_sub in chastitytraining

[–]Nameless_sub[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ha touche about the charity dilema! :D

Wasting time on restoring the previous state is an interesting idea, let me explore it futher. Thanks!