How Much To Stockpile Of Your Favorites?

[Ergative]

4 minutes ago, A Smug Dill said:

even when deep down I know I'm just wasting money.

 

No way, man! You're accomplishing at least two things when you buy these inks:

 

1. You make yourself happy by owning them. That's why people collect things, right? 

2. You tell the retailers, and through them the ink manufacturers, 'Heck, yeah, there's a market for this product! Let's make more!'

 

The first makes your own life better. The second makes everyone else's life better. Keep up the good work!

[PithyProlix]

I'm not stockpiling. Given the amount of ink I have now, a good bit of it which really rocks my boat, coupled with my tendency to try to use a variety of it, it is unlikely that I will run out a bottle. Though if I did run happen to run out of one that I really love it would be a little disappointing if it were no longer available. But there are so many great inks available now and, presumably, in the foreseeable future, that I'd just shrug it off. I love a great deal as much as anyone but, as far as ink goes, while I probably wouldn't pass on a great deal, I'll buy just one bottle of a color regardless of how great it is priced.

 

Moreover, attachment to such things begets suffering. A real danger of this hobby that I see with an alarming frequency is an addiction to consumption.

[Pjake]

I tend to double up on my favorites ....tuski-yo, kon-peki, Akkerman Züiderpark blauw-groen, and Visconti Blue.  Everything else I stock (maybe 10 other inks) are singles.  If I like an ink that I hear maybe discontinued, I can see myself doubling up.

 

[Daneaxe]

Interesting discussion. To ink or not to ink, that's the question.

So far I've not come that far in my ink & pen journey that I even look at duplicates, I'm still building up 1 bottle or sample of a lot of different inks. I have 12 bottles, all different, altho I have Royal Blue from 3 diff suppliers...

In time, I will surely develop some favorites and have (at most) one bottle I'm taking from plus one bottle in stock. That's a year's reserve at my current consumption.

Stay safe,
Daneaxe

[TSherbs]

I don't think that anyone should own more than TWO bottles of any specific ink: one that you have opened and one that is on reserve.

[A Smug Dill]

20 minutes ago, TSherbs said:

I don't think that anyone should own more than TWO bottles of any specific ink: one that you have opened and one that is on reserve.

 

On what basis have you come to that conclusion of “should”?

[sirgilbert357]

On 7/7/2020 at 11:00 PM, A Smug Dill said:

 

 

17 bottles of Pelikan Edelstein Smoky Quartz ink are now in transit to me from the Netherlands by DHL Express. I know who to blame (when my wife questions my decision)!

 

LOL, I just now saw this. Wow. I have three bottles and I've been using it sparingly -- you will be set for a long time with an order like that!!

 

I actually think about ordering another bottle now and then. Not sure how fast I go through it...sometimes I write the date I open a bottle on a little piece of scotch tape and stick it to the bottom of the bottle. I'll then reference that when I finish the bottle to see how long it took me to go through it. I don't think my currently open bottle of Smoky Quartz has the date written on the bottom, so who knows how long I've been working on it...

[sirgilbert357]

On 6/3/2021 at 1:16 AM, PithyProlix said:

I'm not stockpiling. Given the amount of ink I have now, a good bit of it which really rocks my boat, coupled with my tendency to try to use a variety of it, it is unlikely that I will run out a bottle. Though if I did run happen to run out of one that I really love it would be a little disappointing if it were no longer available. But there are so many great inks available now and, presumably, in the foreseeable future, that I'd just shrug it off. I love a great deal as much as anyone but, as far as ink goes, while I probably wouldn't pass on a great deal, I'll buy just one bottle of a color regardless of how great it is priced.

 

Moreover, attachment to such things begets suffering. A real danger of this hobby that I see with an alarming frequency is an addiction to consumption.

 

Very well put, and something I am acutely aware of in my own life with regards to this "hobby". I have bought more pens in the last month than in the previous two years combined (same with inks, actually, but I've only bought three new inks, and a new full bottle of one that is almost gone).

 

I need to cool it a bit and just enjoy what I have!!

[TSherbs]

On 6/7/2021 at 8:30 AM, A Smug Dill said:

 

On what basis have you come to that conclusion of “should”?

For the most part, unnecessary human production and consumption is deleterious to the planet and to the soul. Acquisitiveness and avarice are almost universally recognized by spiritual leaders and wisdom keepers as corrupting to ourselves and a burden to our communities. Curbing our impulse to own and possess, whether it's people, animals, or objects, is widely regarded as virtuous. I happen to agree, even if I lapse myself from time to time. I was not stating a radical idea.  

[OCArt]

When I was fairly new in this fascination I bought an "extra" bottle of the ink I was first exchanted with. It now sits, unloved on the shelf along with the original bottle of the same ink.

 

Tastes change and new inks come out. Few inks will be missed if and when they are gone from the market. Even the legendary PPS has modern equivalents. (well at least close equals)

[A Smug Dill]

30 minutes ago, TSherbs said:

Curbing our impulse to own and possess, whether it's people, animals, or objects, is widely regarded as virtuous. I happen to agree, even if I lapse myself from time to time. I was not stating a radical idea.

 

I was just wondering whether it was based on a code of behaviour to which “anyone” and I would be bound, on the basis of membership in a group or society and the personal obligations that arise from such; or a doctrine to which everyone can be reasonably expected to subscribe. If it's only your personal opinion about others' choices, and not something by which “anyone” else need abide (cf. “should”), then I'd be happy to leave you well alone to your musings, but continue to ‘enable’ and encourage like-minded hobbyists to engage in consumerism and hoarding.

[sirgilbert357]

39 minutes ago, TSherbs said:

For the most part, unnecessary human production and consumption is deleterious to the planet and to the soul. Acquisitiveness and avarice are almost universally recognized by spiritual leaders and wisdom keepers as corrupting to ourselves and a burden to our communities. Curbing our impulse to own and possess, whether it's people, animals, or objects, is widely regarded as virtuous. I happen to agree, even if I lapse myself from time to time. I was not stating a radical idea.  

 

Avarice, I would agree is detrimental, in general. But I have THREE bottles of one of my favorite inks, which is now discontinued and getting hard to find. By your standard, I have too many. Despite the fact that inside a year, I'll have finished one bottle and will then have only TWO, and may not be able to buy more at that time.

 

Not everything is so black and white. Putting a hard limit on the number of bottles of ink you're willing to own is perfectly fine. Applying your standard to others' situations is where it breaks down though.

[atomix]

How often are inks getting discontinued?  I've stockpiled by accident trying many over the years but never expected my favorites to go out of production!

[sirgilbert357]

1 minute ago, atomix said:

How often are inks getting discontinued?  I've stockpiled by accident trying many over the years but never expected my favorites to go out of production!

 

Unless you follow the production schedule of every ink made, that is an impossible question to answer. I would have to assume that with well over 700 different inks out there, inks are being reformulated, or discontinued entirely, more than we know. You'd only find out if a favorite color of yours was unavailable the next time you go to buy a bottle, or the new bottle you got looked different (reformulated).

 

The original inquiry was based on an ink that was known to be limited production from the get go and understood to be discontinued after the initial run, unless it was added to the regular lineup (which there was no indication or hint that it would). As it stands right now, that ink has not been added to the regular lineup and is indeed starting to dry up at certain retailers. It can still be found for now, but it would appear no more is being made and will be unavailable eventually.

[TSherbs]

41 minutes ago, A Smug Dill said:

 

I was just wondering whether it was based on a code of behaviour to which “anyone” and I would be bound, on the basis of membership in a group or society and the personal obligations that arise from such; or a doctrine to which everyone can be reasonably expected to subscribe. If it's only your personal opinion about others' choices, and not something by which “anyone” else need abide (cf. “should”), then I'd be happy to leave you well alone to your musings, but continue to ‘enable’ and encourage like-minded hobbyists to engage in consumerism and hoarding.

It's wisdom, not mandate.

[sirgilbert357]

16 minutes ago, TSherbs said:

It's wisdom, not mandate.

 

The issue was in the phrasing -- using the word "should"...it points to a moral standard we are all beholden to that would apply, in the way you used it, to everyone, regardless of circumstance -- indeed a kind of law or mandate. Hence why Smug Dill asked you the scope of how you meant it to apply. Some people might not think of that word in that way, but...that kind of IS what it means in the context of how you used it.

 

I don't disagree with the general idea that it is wise to avoid avarice. But you honestly can't influence anyone else's habits unless they are truly willing to allow you to -- no matter how wise or virtuous the outcome of said influence would be...having three or four bottles of ink because it's discontinued or you saved on shipping buying it in volume is hardly what I would call something we "should" be avoiding...true avarice looks quite a bit different...

[TSherbs]

Whose trying to "influence" anyone? I just simply stated how I feel. There is an ethic in it for me. I consider the ethic to have a broad wisdom behind it. 

 

I don't think that anyone should own more than two kinds of any pen, either. I'm not preaching, I am just sharing an ethic that I have about possessions. 

 

I am currently intentionally not buying any Tomoe River paper even though there is anxiety out there about it being changed, and it is by far my favorite paper. But if I don't buy it, then someone else can, and that makes me happy. I'm the guy that literally lets 100 other people get their food before me in case there isn't enough for everyone (I did this yesterday; it drives my wife nuts). 

[TSherbs]

1 hour ago, sirgilbert357 said:

 

...true avarice looks quite a bit different...

 

I am quite familiar with avarice and covetousness. I don't agree with you. I consider that a convenient definition that lets one off the hook.

[sirgilbert357]

35 minutes ago, TSherbs said:

Whose trying to "influence" anyone? I just simply stated how I feel. There is an ethic in it for me. I consider the ethic to have a broad wisdom behind it. 

 

I don't think that anyone should own more than two kinds of any pen, either. I'm not preaching, I am just sharing an ethic that I have about possessions. 

 

I am currently intentionally not buying any Tomoe River paper even though there is anxiety out there about it being changed, and it is by far my favorite paper. But if I don't buy it, then someone else can, and that makes me happy. I'm the guy that literally lets 100 other people get their food before me in case there isn't enough for everyone (I did this yesterday; it drives my wife nuts). 

 

Feels vs. should = different standards.

Sharing an ethic = to influence?

 

OK, you weren't trying to "influence" anyone. Fine. Not sure why you felt like posting what you did though. I didn't say "force". Influence can be as subtle as airing a thought in hoping others hear it and think "hmm, that's not a bad idea". But whatever. I wasn't criticizing you, I was bridging the gap between the ideas with my own thoughts. You might be taking it the wrong way...I can't tell at this point.

 

And you don't have to agree with me on avarice. But if the cutoff for you is two bottles and that's virtuous and it suddenly becomes full blown evil avarice at three bottles, then I don't know how you come to that conclusion. And you just judged the moral character of MOST of FPN's users, LOL. It's your own personal standard, and you can apply it to yourself, but to point at anyone else and say that they are morally obligated to act in a virtuous manner (they "should" do, or NOT do something) and then set the standard for their behavior (and based on what? why is it TWO bottles? why not ONE? why not a 5 ml sample vial?) and say they are acting in avarice if they don't abide by your arbitrary rule doesn't follow. To what do you point to -- outside of yourself -- that is the higher moral standard to which we "should" all be held to, and HOW does that set the number of bottles of ink at specifically ONLY two?

 

Are we allowed multiple colors? Should it only be 30 ml or are 50 and 60 ml sizes OK? Geez.

 

What if it's a monk in a monastery and his only possessions are a pen and three bottles of ink?? Full of avarice? Is it that black and white for you? You may find the comparisons silly, but that's walking the idea out...I am curious how rigidly you apply this to your own life. Only two pairs of shoes? What about pants? Socks? What moral code are you referring back to so that you can see how full of avarice you are?? And if it's not based on a moral code, then is it not really just your own subjective feels about it all?

[A Smug Dill]

2 hours ago, TSherbs said:

It's wisdom, not mandate.

 

It's your personal view, but not what is agreed or commonly accepted by the collective of every “anyone” to be wisdom.

 

1 hour ago, TSherbs said:

There is an ethic in it for me. I consider the ethic to have a broad wisdom behind it.

 

To frame something as wisdom is to claim it has merit that has been proven. You may feel it is wisdom, but I'd encourage others to regard your ethic (and mine) as neither wisdom nor mandate when reading your message, and to give it as much due respect as they would something they heard while walking past a Speaker's Corner.