This is the only thread I have even participated in because it is one that interests me. My questions and concerns here are valid. If anything, it is the posters in this thread that know nothing about this kennel or the dogs it produces that are "trolling".
1. this kennel has produced some of the best looking dogs on this forum.
2. they have no known health problems
Two dogs is not a statistically significant sample size, especially given the number of dogs Hungs produces.
And the best-looking dogs on the forum? In your eyes perhaps. And I doubt that was an objective assessment. (no offense intended, GK!) And Hungs has no idea if they are healthy or not, since he isn't keeping track like a reputable breeder would.
People tell me all the time that my dog is beautiful, and I certainly agree. That doesn't make her breed-worthy and it doesn't say anything beneficial about her breeder - who obviously was as poor quality as Hungs since (s)he let my girl wind up in a kill shelter with no safety net.
yet many of you continue to publicly slander this kennel because it does not meet your personal preferences. There are no crimes being committed.
Presenting those comments gets you "reported" on this forum. I am not "wasting" your time. You do not have to post in this thread. Considering you have no experience with this kennel or it's dogs, maybe you shouldn't?
It's less "preferences" and more "standards." Hungs doesn't meet the criteria of this forum for a reputable breeder. Period. As evidenced by his own words as well as actions (no slander here). If you'd like to see the criteria, a good place to start is here: Reputable breeders - for new folks
When you can come back and show evidence that Hungs now meets those criteria (which are pretty basic), then you will have an argument to make.