Feedback for Danny Choo

Why does that actually matter, if you like the dolls? Is it that the dolls are somehow tainted with his "bad behaviour"?

 

Well, it's the same for some people who, after reading Danny Choo's post decided not to give money to Volks anymore? It works the same for other brands.

People stop buying products all the time because they disagree with a company, founder, or CEO's behavior, beliefs, or actions.

 

See boycotts of Chick-Fil-A, Papa John's pizza, etc. This is really no different, it just happens to be with dolls.

 

I disagree with Danny's behavior, therefore I have zero desire to spend my money on his products. I also don't eat at Chick-Fil-A or Papa John's, don't shop at Wal-Mart or CVS, and don't watch movies made by Polanski or starring Cruise. I do NOT "accept the bad because like the goods/services." I'd rather give up a good/service I enjoy than financially support opinions or behaviors I disagree with.

 

If Volks started acting like a sh't publicly, I'd stop giving them my money, too. Because what crosses the line for me is not "talking bad about the competition," it's "talking bad about the competition... and purposefully spreading misinformation... in public." Right now, ONLY Danny has done that latter. Thus, only Danny is on my sh'tlist.

I agree that it is bad etiquette.

But I still don't understand why this should be the decisive argument against buying his products. Is it really only because he does it openly? Why does that actually matter, if you like the dolls? Is it that the dolls are somehow tainted with his "bad behaviour"?

 

Yes. Simply yes.

I love the SmartDoll brand, but I find it very hard to support Danny and his brand when he condones such behavior.

It is there in the open - we can see that his behavior is not good. Is that someone you want to support?

Would you want a product that is built upon trashing other companies/competition and even its own customers?

People stop buying products all the time because they disagree with a company, founder, or CEO's behavior, beliefs, or actions.

 

See boycotts of Chick-Fil-A, Papa John's pizza, etc. This is really no different, it just happens to be with dolls.

 

I disagree with Danny's behavior, therefore I have zero desire to spend my money on his products. I also don't eat at Chick-Fil-A or Papa John's, don't shop at Wal-Mart or CVS, and don't watch movies made by Polanski or starring Cruise. I do NOT "accept the bad because like the goods/services." I'd rather give up a good/service I enjoy than financially support opinions or behaviors I disagree with.

 

If Volks started acting like a sh't publicly, I'd stop giving them my money, too. Because what crosses the line for me is not "talking bad about the competition," it's "talking bad about the competition... and purposefully spreading misinformation... in public." Right now, ONLY Danny has done that latter. Thus, only Danny is on my sh'tlist.

 

A completely valid point of view that incorporates your evaluation of what has happened. Thank you for clarifying your standpoint.

(I have no idea what Chick-a-fil, Papa John's, CVS etc are or what they have done, so I can't say anything about that, but it doesn't sound like those are relevant to this subject. I presume they are big American corporations? The film-related people are really in a category all on their own and I would not compare them to this particular situation.)

 

 

Yes. Simply yes.

I love the SmartDoll brand, but I find it very hard to support Danny and his brand when he condones such behavior.

It is there in the open - we can see that his behavior is not good. Is that someone you want to support?

Would you want a product that is built upon trashing other companies/competition and even its own customers?

 

Thank you both for replying in earnest.

As I said, I thought it was in bad taste to misrepresent the tweet from Volks. But at the same time, that particular detail isn't something that bothered me greatly, since I could inform myself of the real translation and other relevant information regarding it. If that's his view of the situation, so be it. It's hardly going to hurt their sales in the long run. And I think we should also remember that we don't know what has been going on behind the scenes, but we have seen hints of Volks threatening with lawsuits etc.

 

I don't agree that he trashes his own customers. What I do see, however, is a lot of entitled people demanding certain dolls be produced and released at specific times for their benefit. If I got so many comments like that all the time I would get a little bit irritated after a while too, to put it mildly. Would you all write angry letters to Apple about the discontinuation of the iPad mini? Or send a long tweet at IKEA for not carrying that particular shade of bed covers anymore? No, probably not. You go on with your life and find a replacement that works equally well.

 

I have collected dolls for almost 15 years now and I've missed many "grail dolls" because I didn't have the money at the time, the doll was discontinued, the company went out of business, I missed that advertised (or not!) deadline, what have you. At the end of the day, it's plastic. Which, when you think about, probably isn't very environmentally friendly either.

 

Buy the dolls that you want from the makers that you like. That's it. If you have a specific requirement regarding the maker's world views, then let that guide you. But please don't be all high and mighty about it, as if your point of view is the only correct one. Many times I wonder what some of the users are doing in this part of the forum, when most of what they do is actually trash Smart Dolls.

As I said, I thought it was in bad taste to misrepresent the tweet from Volks. But at the same time, that particular detail isn't something that bothered me greatly, since I could inform myself of the real translation and other relevant information regarding it. If that's his view of the situation, so be it. It's hardly going to hurt their sales in the long run. And I think we should also remember that we don't know what has been going on behind the scenes, but we have seen hints of Volks threatening with lawsuits etc.

 

This is one thing I fail to comprehend. Why is it that we should remember hints of Volks threatening with lawsuits (hinted at by Danny himself btw)? What has this got to do with Danny deliberately mistranslating a tweet by Volks and dragging their name through the mud? I fail to see how the former justifies the latter. It's the same argument brought up by people in the FB group and I just cannot understand.

 

I don't agree that he trashes his own customers. What I do see, however, is a lot of entitled people demanding certain dolls be produced and released at specific times for their benefit. If I got so many comments like that all the time I would get a little bit irritated after a while too, to put it mildly. Would you all write angry letters to Apple about the discontinuation of the iPad mini? Or send a long tweet at IKEA for not carrying that particular shade of bed covers anymore? No, probably not. You go on with your life and find a replacement that works equally well.

 

But what about the customers who were simply asking about why Haruka's wig was not pink? The one who only asked if there might be a time sale in the near future and spent time refreshing the site after being trolled by Danny that the time sale was happening that very day? I felt so sorry for him when he asked and people told him it was probably a joke. I don't think it's right to treat all customers as if they're entitled jerks. Some genuinely just want to know.

 

Buy the dolls that you want from the makers that you like. That's it. If you have a specific requirement regarding the maker's world views, then let that guide you. But please don't be all high and mighty about it, as if your point of view is the only correct one. Many times I wonder what some of the users are doing in this part of the forum, when most of what they do is actually trash Smart Dolls.

 

I don't see any trashing of Smart dolls here. Mostly it's people speaking out against Danny's behaviour on social media, and that's only on this thread. This thread wasn't even very active until he pulled his latest stunt. There are so many other nice threads with lovely pictures. I visit the Smart dolls section mostly to check K-2's photostory thread. If you think this forum is mostly trashing of Smart dolls I have no idea what threads you're reading.

Many times I wonder what some of the users are doing in this part of the forum, when most of what they do is actually trash Smart Dolls.

 

I've not seen any trashing of SmartDolls. Unless you think of any form of criticism towards the dolls..?

Criticism is good for development. Where it's due.

I'd rather not have to be a blind follower (praising every aspect) to be allowed into a fan-base.

Based on what I've seen, Danny really needs to hire a Social Media Manager/PR Manager. I highly doubt that he will, but it would be a great business move on his part seeing as many people are not happy with how he interacts on SM.

 

It was definitely unprofessional of Danny to spread misinformation intentionally or not, but I personally don't see the problem with bashing Volks. That's honestly always have been a business tactic, and a good one at that. You want your brand to look better than a competitors and the only factor deciding if the results are good or bad his how you deliver it. In this case, Danny delivered it very wrong. However, I understand that people's tolerance for tomfoolery vary greatly.

Cauldroness' response summed up perfectly why company behaviour matters to me. I wouldn't support any company that engages in behaviour that I don't approve of.

 

With regards to their examples, I looked it up and found that people boycott Chick-Fil-A for opposing gay marriage, Papa John and CVS for racist actions and Walmart for a lot of different reasons, the most recent one being Trump supporters boycotting it for selling T-shirts with "Impeach 45" on it (45 being a reference to President Trump, the 45th president of the USA).

 

I have no doubt that Danny has to deal with demanding, unreasonable customers every single day. I've worked in customer service. So I know out of experience that it's exhausting dealing with entitled people and it can be *VERY* hard to keep your cool. But unfortunately, that's part of the job. When dealing with unreasonable customers, you have to stay cool in public otherwise it can reflect poorly on your business :-/

This is one thing I fail to comprehend. Why is it that we should remember hints of Volks threatening with lawsuits (hinted at by Danny himself btw)? What has this got to do with Danny deliberately mistranslating a tweet by Volks and dragging their name through the mud? I fail to see how the former justifies the latter. It's the same argument brought up by people in the FB group and I just cannot understand.

 

Because maybe he feels justified in his behaviour?

I have no idea. I'm just saying there might be more to it than we see, which is not a justification, but a possible explanation. I fail to see how only one interpretation of the story is allowed.

 

But what about the customers who were simply asking about why Haruka's wig was not pink? The one who only asked if there might be a time sale in the near future and spent time refreshing the site after being trolled by Danny that the time sale was happening that very day? I felt so sorry for him when he asked and people told him it was probably a joke. I don't think it's right to treat all customers as if they're entitled jerks. Some genuinely just want to know.

 

I know there are some genuinely valid questions out there, but I was specifically referring to all the angry or entitled comments about release dates, discontinued dolls etc. Plus, there is such a thing as Google and people should perhaps use that more often sometimes.

 

 

I don't see any trashing of Smart dolls here. Mostly it's people speaking out against Danny's behaviour on social media, and that's only on this thread. This thread wasn't even very active until he pulled his latest stunt. There are so many other nice threads with lovely pictures. I visit the Smart dolls section mostly to check K-2's photostory thread. If you think this forum is mostly trashing of Smart dolls I have no idea what threads you're reading.

 

Maybe I visit only the threads with negativity in them, then? The ones I have been in were mostly relating to new products or releases and there are a lot of comments about how ugly SmDs are (compared to DD), how pricey everything is (compared to DD?) and how unpleasant Danny is (compared to I have no idea whom).

 

 

I've not seen any trashing of SmartDolls. Unless you think of any form of criticism towards the dolls..?

Criticism is good for development. Where it's due.

I'd rather not have to be a blind follower (praising every aspect) to be allowed into a fan-base.

 

There doesn't need to be an either-or situation. Why should there be?

But I still wonder why people who are genuinely not interested in SmD in any other way than to constantly criticise them are always commenting here. I think the thread about Mika is a very good example of that, but it's also been prevalent in other threads. (I understand some people think SmD have flat faces, but do they have to post that 10 times about a doll they're not going to buy anyway.)

 

I used to post more often here before, especially photos of my dolls. But for a while there was hardly any activity and then all the negativity turned up, which just turned me off. Any new thread about what I found to be exciting news about a release was mostly met with negative comments, not constructive discussion.

 

You can't please everyone, but many times I get the feeling people don't even bother to understand how Danny works with social media (disregarding the whole Volks tweet thing now). From what I understand he gauges interest in new products by posting about prototypes on social media. If there isn't enough interest, it's not getting a release or it may be re-worked and then shown in a new form. But apparently, people think that every teaser he posts is of an actual product and that's when all the negative commenting starts. Granted, this may be a really roundabout way of running a business, but this is the way he has chosen to do it. I sort of think we need to accept that and then base our shopping behaviour off of that. I understand people get frustrated when they start dreaming up a character based on a photo posted once in May, when that doll ends up looking different in actual production come October. But you can't fault him for that disappointment.

Cauldroness' response summed up perfectly why company behaviour matters to me. I wouldn't support any company that engages in behaviour that I don't approve of.

 

You do realise this would be virtually impossible in this world we live in? I don't mean to sound harsh, but it's quite naive to say that. I could provide you with a list of companies with questionable behaviour in many fields and you would find it hard to buy food, clothes or even a place to live if you were truly to follow your own words.

 

I would say that in this case some future and some current customers of Smart Doll have chosen to no longer buy those products, because they have decided to apply their moral compass to one particular dollmaker. And that's fine. It's anyone's prerogative to take their business elsewhere if they feel like it, for whatever reason. But don't sit on your high horse and talk about company behaviour clashing with your ideals about the world, because that is frankly risible.

 

I do however agree with you about customer support being a job for those with endless patience. I have also been there and done that. And it is also quite possible that Danny should hire someone with more social media diplomacy.

@Torino: I agree with your points on both parts. On the patterns I just think it's hypocritcal given what he's doing right now and how he specifically talks about not banning other dolls from his store. It's also an unenforceable request. If I make a t-shirt for my DD that I never show anyone, are the Smart Doll Police going to come for me? How will they know? If I modify the pattern as allowed, at what point does it become its own thing?

 

The section about "be nice to the bus driver" to me is both him explaining his behavior, yet in reality shows how out of touch he is with what he is actually doing.

 

I don't agree that he trashes his own customers. What I do see, however, is a lot of entitled people demanding certain dolls be produced and released at specific times for their benefit.

But this isn't the case. A user on instagram, "allys.workshop" posted very resonable comments about this current thing, he answered her by saying "lol" and when she replied that wasn't a nice way to address her concerns he responded with "lolol" and now he has deleted all her comments from the thread. He responded in similar ways to those who asked why Haruka's hair color isn't pink and other similar questions that aren't being entitled at all.

 

I agree that it is bad etiquette.

But I still don't understand why this should be the decisive argument against buying his products. Is it really only because he does it openly? I mean, I'm not saying people should change their minds, I'm just wondering why internet conduct is so important to some collectors in regards to Smart Doll specifically. Why does that actually matter, if you like the dolls? Is it that the dolls are somehow tainted with his "bad behaviour"?

I am only speaking for myself as I suspect my view on this might be somewhat unique, but the answer is absolutely yes!

 

I'll put up the disclaimer that I don't own any of his dolls because the styles aren't to my taste; I dislike the head scuplts and how they are usually so flat. I continually hoped he'd make a doll I really liked so I could buy one. Back when he was selling bodies separately for a while and actually promoting using DD heads on them, I was going to do that though changed my mind before actually going through with it. I've always liked the clothing, and wanted to support him. How he started his company from nothing, did things his own way, and successfully took on competition was inspiring too.

 

I'm an very old guy that's sufferred basically life-long depression. Three years or so ago I found the Smart Doll and Danny's websites and started reading about the products and all of his business philosophy and articles, like this page:

http://www.dannychoo.com/en/post/27282/Design+Philosophy.html

I found his particular style of positivity inspiring and helpful and something that made my life suck a bit less. I wanted to support him because of this.

 

[in early days of the company, he had a doll t-shirt that said "Doing something leads to something doing nothing always leads to nothing"...I wanted that shirt and a friend saw to it that I got it. Looking at it on especially bad days is helpful to me.]

 

Danny isn't just selling a doll. He's selling his vision for the company and his philosophy. He chose to market this way, and in my opinion this makes how he behaves a much more integral part of the product you are buying than it is for most typical companies. Either way, if Volks tried to make their competition look bad by intentionally mistranslating something, and doubling down on it when asked about it repeatedly (to be blunt, the word here is lying), I wouldn't be happy with them either.

 

Like Cauldroness I try to avoid buying from companies that have business practices I don't agree with. About once a month I take a ~120 mile round trip for grocery shopping specifically to avoid shopping at Walmart since I live in one of the small towns where they have put pretty much everyone else out of business. I'm not bragging on that just saying I do make some effort to actually do what I believe in.

 

Cauldroness' response summed up perfectly why company behaviour matters to me. I wouldn't support any company that engages in behaviour that I don't approve of.

You do realise this would be virtually impossible in this world we live in? I don't mean to sound harsh, but it's quite naive to say that. I could provide you with a list of companies with questionable behaviour in many fields and you would find it hard to buy food, clothes or even a place to live if you were truly to follow your own words.

This is a logical fallacy. Because I can't avoid all bad behavior at all companies, it's pointless to avoid any or even try? We all pick and choose our battles, or the particular transgressions we care about the most.

 

 

Anyway, to summarize the long explanation, it's hard for me to reconcile the person who wrote the inspirational articles with the one that is condescending and rude towards everyone, and the latter taints the former because it makes it hard for me to believe he actually lives by the things he wrote.

Just because it may be totally impossible to live that way doesn't mean a person shouldn't strive to. Doesn't mean a person can't make the attempt. Doesn't mean it's not worthy to try.

 

I may never be in perfect health, but that doesn't stop me from trying to be a little bit healthier every day.

I may not be able to avoid giving money to EVERY company I disagree with, but that doesn't stop me from boycotting the most egregious examples of bad brand behavior either.

 

It's not naive. It's hopeful. And don't you dare start telling me hope is a bad thing.

 

Besides, belpita, it seems incredibly hypocritical to tell anyone to "not sit on your high horse" when you're sitting up on a really high horse judging whether or not there's any value in attempting to spend by one's morals. Who made you grand arbitrator on this topic? Definitely not me.

 

Thankfully, I don't have to take your opinion into account when I spend MY money. I'll spend it how I like -- and that means not diving Danny a danged cent. It's clear his nasty corporate behavior is breeding nasty fan behavior, too.

You do realise this would be virtually impossible in this world we live in? I don't mean to sound harsh, but it's quite naive to say that. I could provide you with a list of companies with questionable behaviour in many fields and you would find it hard to buy food, clothes or even a place to live if you were truly to follow your own words.

 

That is very true. It's impossible to boycott every single company that engages in bad behaviour 'cause some of them make products that I need to live.

 

But as you already pointed out early, dolls are a luxury item. Therefore I am able to choose which companies I support and which ones I don't. For example, in 2011, Leekeworld, a BJD and wig company, plagiarized the design of a doll originally created by Dust of Dolls. I don't approve of plagiarism so since then, I've not bought Leekeworld products. Did it make a difference? Probably not. Leekeworld is still in business after all these years.

Will it make a difference to Danny if I never buy a Smart Doll product again? The answer is also 'probably not' but that doesn't mean I don't have a choice in the matter.

 

Please understand that I don't mean ill towards Danny or Smart Doll.

 

This is a logical fallacy. Because I can't avoid all bad behavior at all companies, it's pointless to avoid any or even try? We all pick and choose our battles, or the particular transgressions we care about the most.

 

 

Anyway, to summarize the long explanation, it's hard for me to reconcile the person who wrote the inspirational articles with the one that is condescending and rude towards everyone, and the latter taints the former because it makes it hard for me to believe he actually lives by the things he wrote.

 

1. It's not a logical fallacy because I replied to exactly what Eiko wrote, ie "I wouldn't support any company that engages in behaviour that I don't approve of." That is literally not possible if you want to live in this particular world. I do agree you have to pick your battles, which was what my following paragraph explained.

 

2. This is similar for me too and I also mentioned that earlier. I have no answers as to why he seemingly swings from one side to the other in his behaviour towards others. I can only say that I suppose it's up to each of us whether we look past that because we like the dolls, or whether that becomes the decisive reason not to buy them.

 

Just because it may be totally impossible to live that way doesn't mean a person shouldn't strive to. Doesn't mean a person can't make the attempt. Doesn't mean it's not worthy to try.

 

I may never be in perfect health, but that doesn't stop me from trying to be a little bit healthier every day.

I may not be able to avoid giving money to EVERY company I disagree with, but that doesn't stop me from boycotting the most egregious examples of bad brand behavior either.

 

It's not naive. It's hopeful. And don't you dare start telling me hope is a bad thing.

 

Besides, belpita, it seems incredibly hypocritical to tell anyone to "not sit on your high horse" when you're sitting up on a really high horse judging whether or not there's any value in attempting to spend by one's morals. Who made you grand arbitrator on this topic? Definitely not me.

 

Thankfully, I don't have to take your opinion into account when I spend MY money. I'll spend it how I like -- and that means not diving Danny a danged cent. It's clear his nasty corporate behavior is breeding nasty fan behavior, too.

 

Wow, just wow. But then again, this comment in itself proves my point about the whole atmosphere here. I was not telling you how to spend your money and I was not judging the value of anybody's morals. Feel free to read my comment again.

 

Also, naive doesn't exclude hopeful.

 

That is very true. It's impossible to boycott every single company that engages in bad behaviour 'cause some of them make products that I need to live.

 

But as you already pointed out early, dolls are a luxury item. Therefore I am able to choose which companies I support and which ones I don't. For example, in 2011, Leekeworld, a BJD and wig company, plagiarized the design of a doll originally created by Dust of Dolls. I don't approve of plagiarism so since then, I've not bought Leekeworld products. Did it make a difference? Probably not. Leekeworld is still in business after all these years.

Will it make a difference to Danny if I never buy a Smart Doll product again? The answer is also 'probably not' but that doesn't mean I don't have a choice in the matter.

 

Please understand that I don't mean ill towards Danny or Smart Doll.

 

This is exactly what my second paragraph was about.

You do realise this would be virtually impossible in this world we live in? I don't mean to sound harsh, but it's quite naive to say that. I could provide you with a list of companies with questionable behaviour in many fields and you would find it hard to buy food, clothes or even a place to live if you were truly to follow your own words.

 

Weeeell, personally I'll still buy food and clothes from a corrupt establishment. I need to eat and clothe myself. Hypothetically, if I lived in a small village with only one asshole farmer to get overpriced food from, I kind of have no choice. I just gotta eat, man. Irl, there's a bit more leeway with clothing so there's the option of buying from small indie brands and local boutiques.

 

But dolls are luxury products. I can choose not to directly support a CEO I dislike. I'm also fine with picking up their products second-hand since he won't get my money directly. I'm okay with supporting Mandarake or maybe a fellow doll collector.

 

Just my two yen cents...

@belpita

 

I think pointing out certain parts of a sculpt is standard procedure whenever a new sculpt is released? I don't really see it as trashing the doll in question. Like someone pointed out DD Ruler had eyes that were set further apart than usual so I made myself peer at dozens of pictures just to make sure I still really really wanted her xD I actually find those comments helpful because they make me look at and notice the doll from all sorts of angles. When I first got dolls there were a few instances when I felt disappointed seeing the doll irl, because there were certain parts of the sculpt I didn't like and couldn't get over once I noticed them. So I wouldn't exactly say it's trashing the doll as long as the observations or comments are accurate.

 

Edit: Also you might want to reconsider using words like "don't be all high and mighty" and "don't sit on your high horse" because it comes across like you've already judged everyone whose opinion differs from yours. It's fine for opinions to differ.

@belpita

 

Okay, so why are we not allowed to refer to the good customers Danny has nipped at? Everytime someone brings up a good point, you cut it down or pass it as 'irrelevent to the subject'.

 

He has bad customers- but literally every company has bad customers. How these people choose to respond to any customer however, is what separates the professionals, from the non-professionals. And Danny is showing to be quite unprofessional, why?

 

Because he's snapped at way more innocent customers, than bad, and the ONLY time he ever apologies, he passes it off as 'British humor'. As a human being with English as their first language, I KNOW it's not 'British humor', especially since I grew up around the same area he did. He's just been plain rude, because he can't stand that someone goes against his vision. I'm not going to invest in his product only for him to think that I support his bad behavior. Sure he has tons of customers, but my name is in his customer records. My posts have been retweeted onto his page.

 

I dunno, I'd rather support a company that knows when to keep quiet, than someone who is openly a douche, and has no interest in fixing his attitude. So since he doesn't want to correct his poor behavior, then I can just choose not to support him. But that doesn't make me wrong, and it doesn't make anyone else who thinks the same, wrong. It's one thing to defend bad attitude, but to call people out, accusing them of sitting on a high horse just for having good morals is also bad attitude, belpita. Because at least they have good morals.

You keep bringing up the emails Danny has mentioned about VOLKS, but at the end of the day you're only hearing one side of the story. How do you know that Danny isn't threatening them too? It's best not to speculate, or bring up things when we don't even have 1% of the details.

 

We all can toot that VOLKS is a mega company and won't be affected by his tweet but there are people that design their dolls, people that work just as hard as Danny does to make a doll come to life. I respect these back end creators too much to respect a guy that insults their integrity. Because again, taking someone's tweet, just to humiliate them, is disgusting.

 

As a final note, while people aren't happy with Danny Choo, it doesn't mean we hate him, or his dolls. We can appreciate the good he's done, but also be critical when he screws up. Because it's not about screwing up, it's about HOW MUCH he's screwing up. And how he doesn't intend on fixing his mistakes.

 

This is exactly what my second paragraph was about.

 

Okay, I understand. I guess I should've clearly stated in my first post that I meant that I don't suppport luxury item brands that engages in behaviour that I don't approve of.

 

I don't know if the high horse comment was directed at me. I hope not 'cause I have tried to answer your questions as politely and honestly as I can. But if I did come across as riding on a high horse, I do apologize.

Clearly, whatever I say is now twisted into me defending his behaviour or telling people what they are supposed to think and do. I will try to re-cap what I have said in the hopes that I am understood.

 

1. Danny behaves erratically online and none of us have any way of knowing why, but there may be a number of reasons, some of which I have suggested.

 

2. All people are free to buy whatever they want.

 

3. My general perception of this forum is that SmDs are tolerated to an extent and many users feel a need to comment in a negative way on them just for the sake of commenting.

 

4. Bringing up your high moral standards for purchasing behaviour unrelated to this topic does come off as a little haughty.

 

5. Some people online are rude and demanding. Other people are confused newbies. In an ideal world they would all be met with the same patient replies. I don’t know why they are not.

 

It’s funny that I have been following this thread with interest since its start, thinking I should not engage because I knew this is how it would end up. And yet, here I am.

3. My general perception of this forum is that SmDs are tolerated to an extent and many users feel a need to comment in a negative way on them just for the sake of commenting.

While I think I really do understand why you feel this way, I don't think it's really the case.

 

If you read the Volks announcement topics people will be nitpicky there too when any character doll especially is announced; I bitched a lot in the Luka thread, and in the Sailor Moon thread a lot of the people who loved the anime growing up felt Volks didn't do the character justice.

 

The Mika Jougasaki topic is a little different, and I know there was a lot of negativity there, including from me. I feel there's an extra issue at play here--she's part of a series that until now has all been DDs. Whatever one's opinion is of Doffie Dream vs. Smart Doll in general, or even if you love both, I think it's easy to see the dolls have a pretty different aesthetic and don't necessarily go well together. So now we have a girl who is part of a subseries (Cinderella Girls) of a series (Idolmaster) where Volks has made all the dolls until now, and in the Cinderella Girls line alone there are six other dolls and there are currently eight in their other Idolmaster line. So Mika isn't going to really match the aesthetic of the others, and she's going to be too tall as well, as had Volks made her she'd have been a DDS no doubt. This is also why there may have been people in that thread that otherwise wouldn't comment on Smart Dolls at all.

 

I also believe there would have been less animosity had Danny picked one of the other Idolmaster subseries that Volks wasn't already doing.

 

I'm not discounting the rest of your points; I just don't have anything further to say as I already said my piece in that long post above.

..//..

 

I also believe there would have been less animosity had Danny picked one of the other Idolmaster subseries that Volks wasn't already doing.

 

I'm not discounting the rest of your points; I just don't have anything further to say as I already said my piece in that long post above.

 

Thank you for keeping the tone civil and replying in a constructive, non-aggressive way.

While I understand and respect that people can have differing expectations on dolls, this animosity feels alien to me. Licenses are apparently things you can negotiate on a doll by doll basis, not for a whole series. So Danny got one (or more?) licenses and chose to interpret that character using his particular style. If you don't like it, that's fine. But it's not as if he owns DD collectors a doll to their liking, just because Volks made some of the other characters.

 

I think many of us SmD collectors are very enthusiastic about our dolls, so it hurts to see a lot of comments in the vein of "obviously lesser aesthetics". The tone is sometimes a bit condescending.

 

Similarly, right now with this argument about his behaviour, I feel there is this either-or situation. If you choose to keep buying his dolls, you're on the bad side. If you take your patronage away from him, you're on the good side. This is interesting, since there are so many customers out there who are completely oblivious or uninterested in how he behaves. Are they also then bad people?

Clearly, whatever I say is now twisted into me defending his behaviour or telling people what they are supposed to think and do. I will try to re-cap what I have said in the hopes that I am understood.

 

1. Danny behaves erratically online and none of us have any way of knowing why, but there may be a number of reasons, some of which I have suggested.

 

2. All people are free to buy whatever they want.

 

3. My general perception of this forum is that SmDs are tolerated to an extent and many users feel a need to comment in a negative way on them just for the sake of commenting.

 

4. Bringing up your high moral standards for purchasing behaviour unrelated to this topic does come off as a little haughty.

 

5. Some people online are rude and demanding. Other people are confused newbies. In an ideal world they would all be met with the same patient replies. I don’t know why they are not.

 

It’s funny that I have been following this thread with interest since its start, thinking I should not engage because I knew this is how it would end up. And yet, here I am.

 

Well first of all I hope you don't feel like you've been ostracized, to me, this is just a debate. It's not like Danny Choo is interested in reading the stuff that transpires in this forum anyway. But as potential/existing consumers we have to be able vent somewhere, and your opinion is as valid as everyone elses This thread was started with faith that, because Danny does do good things, he could change for the better. Not to force him into being a slave to his customers.

 

When I said you were defending his actions, I don't mean you think he can do no wrong. You've stated umpteenth times that you questioned his decision to release the tweet, but at the same time you mentioned not being bothered by it. And the way you choose your words makes it look like you're implying people are too sensitive for thinking defamation is an issue. And when people mentioned the attitude he had towards good customers, you just cut them off and said 'I wasn't referring to them.'. To me, that's being defensive.

 

Many of the people here have mentioned they didn't want to support Danny Choo because their actions go against their morals, but they only said it because you asked why internet etiquette was such a big deal when it comes to doll purchasing. Everyone has different ticks that strikes them as distasteful, this happens to be one of mine, I personally would rather put my funds somewhere else than actively support someone who continues to say harmful things without care. That's not wrong. We're not saying that EVERYONE should stop buying from him. Again, choosing NOT to buy directly from an open douche, is not actually haughty and even if it is, you pointing that fact out just came off a little pot calling the kettle black. I mean, we didn't question why you'd choose to support him. That's none of our business

 

I will let you know that whilst this is a subforum in a Dollfie Dream platform, the criticism you see in the other threads is actually the same everywhere. There's LOADS of DD fans that hate on several of VOLKS' dolls, it's just most tend to know they're only speaking of their personal opinion. Whilst they are critical it's not like they're running around questioning WHY someone wants to buy a doll they personally don't like.

 

To me, I'll always love dolls, and even when I say I won't support him, that doesn't mean I think he's done nothing good. I'll still look at his new releases and be excited over certain products. I'll still be following him on Twitter and Instagram. I'll still talk about my Eiji.K, but I just won't be putting a cent into his establishment. And I don't mean to say people that continue to buy Smart Dolls are beneath me (and I don't recall people implying such a thing?), buy what you want, I'm gonna be watching all the box openings and pictures to gush over them regardless, considering it's not his dolls that I find concerning.

Edited August 20, 2018 by Guest

I’m really tired of having to write the same thing over and over in different ways to clarify what I am saying, so I’m not going to comment any further. But thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt.

 

At some point, I hope everything will sort itself out in regards to what is or what isn’t Smart Doll business practice, so that we can stop having these arguments and just focus on the dolls.

 

ETA: Actually, looking back at our conversation I realise where people may have misunderstood me, so i will try to explain. Please forgive me, if I’m a little blabbery. I’ve had a really crappy morning.

 

My comment about the whole moral aspect wasn’t directly relating to buying from Danny Choo. It was more that when someone feels the need to bring up how they have high moral standards regarding their shopping behaviour, it does rub me the wrong way. Because it’s a grey scale. We all do good things and we all do bad things. Like I said, it would be nearly impossible to keep up a guilt free consumption pattern in this world. Pointing out what a good person you are always makes me a little wary. I would personally rather say I am imperfect, but I try my best. Sometimes I do feel the bad outweighs the good, and there isn’t always only one definition of ‘bad’. Does that make more sense?

My comment about the whole moral aspect wasn’t directly relating to buying from Danny Choo. It was more that when someone feels the need to bring up how they have high moral standards regarding their shopping behaviour, it does rub me the wrong way. Because it’s a grey scale. We all do good things and we all do bad things. Like I said, it would be nearly impossible to keep up a guilt free consumption pattern in this world. Pointing out what a good person you are always makes me a little wary. I would personally rather say I am imperfect, but I try my best. Sometimes I do feel the bad outweighs the good, and there isn’t always only one definition of ‘bad’. Does that make more sense?

 

I agree that it is bad etiquette.

But I still don't understand why this should be the decisive argument against buying his products. Is it really only because he does it openly? Why does that actually matter, if you like the dolls? Is it that the dolls are somehow tainted with his "bad behaviour"?

 

Um, but no one was really talking about morals until you wrote this, so I think people were just trying to explain their reasoning to you, and not deliberately trying to bring up their high moral standards. No one is pointing out what a good person they are. They're just explaining their reasoning for choosing not to buy from Danny. It's like you aren't bothered by his behaviour and would continue to buy from him, and you have your own reasoning for doing so. It's just a matter of personal choice and preference.

Um, but no one was really talking about morals until you wrote this, so I think people were just trying to explain their reasoning to you, and not deliberately trying to bring up their high moral standards. No one is pointing out what a good person they are. They're just explaining their reasoning for choosing not to buy from Danny. It's like you aren't bothered by his behaviour and would continue to buy from him, and you have your own reasoning for doing so. It's just a matter of personal choice and preference.

 

Yeah, ok. I give up.

This is obviously your opinion on me, regardless of what I say or how I try to explain myself.

I understand there is only one way to approach this and mine is not correct.