Why are some artisans being bit harsh towards other artisans?

I have about 30 soaps. Have never had a so called bad soap. I would buy every single one of them again. Except arko. Just don't like the scent. Good performer though.

Same but I like Arko scent reminds me of childhood and getting hotel soap.

Though I do research before buying soaps, so I've avoided terrible soaps. Heck even that odd square soap performs ok.

As far as we are concerned the soapers here don't act as you describe so it must just be an unsubstantiated statement from you, and that's about it. You are the one and only person who makes this claim and no one here can say why soapers trash talk each other only in your inbox. Until the trash talk is made public, or comes straight from the soapers, you are asking us to describe someone's line of thought on a hunch or a guess. And it still smells like!e BS to me.

olschoolsteel is right, so why even bring it up? In this instance, I will say "who really cares" about drama (real or imagined) between soapers? Especially when you won't even say who or what it's about.

It was an emailed news letter from the artisan company.

To name the company would be making inflammatory post. Rather I made s vague post. Apparently there's more then one such company who's done so. I didn't attack all artisans. I said some.

I'm not one to want to attack others even if I disagree with their opinions. Serval shave you tubers will vaguely talk about some companies or other shavers bad actions without naming names. I agree with their policy.mi don't want to start some crusade against the company Like what happen with htgam. I simply wanted to discuss why some artisans would be negative towards others.

Similar to why did Pepsi run negative cocola ads. I don't get negative ads or words towards competition. Ones product should stand on its own.

You could easily "change names to protect the innocent" and show us the e mail. Or pertinent parts of it. Without context, the original question isn't very clear.

Was the artisan commenting on how many soapers are jumping onto the shave soap bandwagon and marketing crappy soaps at art fairs in your local park?

It the artisan a well known maker who is trashing other well known makers?


Big difference between the two. You gotta give us something to work with.

You could easily "change names to protect the innocent" and show us the e mail. Or pertinent parts of it. Without context, the original question isn't very clear.

Was the artisan commenting on how many soapers are jumping onto the shave soap bandwagon and marketing crappy soaps at art fairs in your local park?

It the artisan a well known maker who is trashing other well known makers?


Big difference between the two. You gotta give us something to work with.

Dittos. I was going to suggest that very thing if he still has the email. I know that my emails go to digital heaven unless I deliberately hold onto them, so after a few days it would be gone from my system. Maybe Slyfoxs system too.

But even if the name isn't removed. It was sent out as a more or less public document. One doesn't email a newsletter to hundreds of people (I'm assuming) and expect confidentiality. It can be forwarded, correct? There goes any expectation of confidentiality, so I don't understand why the perp' needs to be protected. Just my $.02 worth.

I think that the inner thoughts of someone who does this sort of knife turning in the dark should be outed. The rest of us act decently by choice.

I will be the Paria here. I call BS on the original post of this thread. To make an inflammatory statement without proof or a source is tantamount to trolling.

If indeed it was a personal message to the OP, and he makes it public, that's a whole 'nother can of worms. Someone may have confided in them, and that confidence is now broken.

Until proof is provided this thread could go down the conspiracy rabbit hole in a hurry and in the mean time all the witch hunters are frothing for a kill. When the OP comes back with something more substantial than vague innuendo, I consider this nothing more than an instigator of trouble.

I agree. The original post is incendiary to say the least.

It seems to me, and I certainly could be wrong, that if this was a newsletter sent via email presumably to a number of subscribers, that one of two things has happened:

Either no other members of this forum subscribe to the artisan in question or the newsletter was not sent to all subscribers. There is ultimately a third possibility but I won't accuse the op of intentionally misleading us with phony accusations. I choose to believe better of the intentions.

I would like to see the email if for no other reason than to know which artisan to continue to avoid. I get a lot of newsletters and while I don't read every word, I do scan every newsletter. This is not an issue I have come across as of yet...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wolfman, unnamed soap artisans, wow, DFS is on a roll of nonsense, lol.....

From OSP site:

"All shaving soaps weigh 140g, and come in sturdy white plastic screw lid containers. The labels are no-nonsense and colour coded. The soaps are named so that you know what you are getting, you won't find any names like "Conscientiousness" or "Camaraderie" here! Just plain and simple soap that is 100% good for your skin. If it doesn't help your skin in some way, it isn't included, simple as that!"

I was about to make an order but then saw that and didn't make any. We all know to whom artisan they refer to, especially to the Soap Commander artisan company and its makers that use to give such names to their products. I would say that it's better to let the soap and its quality speak for itself and not make these arrogant statements.

Just my opinion.

Without evidence I'm not buying the story -- at least as presented. If a seller was trying to differentiate themselves from stuff someone might pick up at a craft fair, that I can understand, because there could be some truth in that. To make that allegation regarding all other artisan soaps in general would be very ridiculous on its face and ultimately a very self-defeating statement. I know my first reaction on reading something like that would be to look for the unsubscribe link.