But no one here cares whether the original question was answered or not; the whole point is that the customer service rep's response is important enough on its own that the original question no longer matters.
Sure no one here cares, but that's because people here just want to hear Geno and Smash in the same sentence from anyone somehow related to Nintendo. However the point of customer service is to address the questions and concerns of the customer, which didn't happen here. The rep's response is only important if you care about what they have to say, and people here care more about Geno in Smash than Geno's ownership, but Geno's ownership was the issue brought to customer service. So yes, people here might care more about what the issue was diverted to, but unless you got an answer to the original question, unless it was solved, which doesn't seem to be the case, the original question still matters.
It's nice that someone at Nintendo cares about Geno, but that doesn't change anything, and you're no more informed now than before the question was asked, so obviously it matters.
I've lurked and watched these character campaigns for years; a response like the one we saw today is one that has never been given before. It's not a canned response, a canned response would have been a short blurb saying that only Square owns the rights with no indication of the rep's personal feelings toward the matter at all. The fact that they mentioned Geno and the rep expressed desire to see Geno in Smash, by itself, alone, is proof that this is not a canned response and is genuinely their opinion. There's nothing fooling anyone here and the importance of the response isn't invalid in any way.
How convenient the response would change to include Smash right after the poll went up then, now that Nintendo actually wants to hear from people like the type who would send in asking about Geno, isn't it?
I didn't mean it was canned in that it wasn't personalized at all, just that it had all the hallmarks of a canned message, namely lack of answering the question and a roundabout way of promoting something of the company's that wasn't related to the question. And btw they still could've said all they did say plus the fact that Geno was owned by Square, that at least would've been answering the question.
If you truly feel that this is just a form letter meant to make the writer feel better, then I invite you to send them a similar question about another character like Banjo Kazooie and posting the response here; if it's extremely similar save for some name swaps then your statement will have some basis. Until then, I have seen (and received!) actual canned responses so I know that this is not one of them.
I mean I could... or I could just send in a question asking about Geno's legal ownership...
But I've gotten way off from my original point, which was simply that one customer service rep's opinion, authentic or not, doesn't inherently equal Nintendo's.