master valve said: STOP PLAYING HL2 NOW!

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 03 Feb 2005, Jeff wrote:

> Jeff has other things needing doing besides participating in this
> debate... hence his desire for "Mean" to do his own homework and not force
> Jeff to repeat yet again what has already been detailed before in this
> newsgroup ad nauseam.

i really hope you will always find time to post in this group and yes its
such a waste of time reading the clority trash
clority is insignificant and harmless cause what he represent is the
worse of the worse steam lovers fanatics have to offer

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 03 Feb 2005, Mean_Chlorine wrote:

> Of course it hasn't. Neither physically or emotionally. While the
> reduced resale value and the time spent activating might be considered
> financial harm, it can not be considered "significant".

for you its not, but you are another steam lover which can't see besides
himself

> Jeff knows this of course, hence his song and dance number.

Jeff know what he writes, he writes not only about the practicles reasons
steam is wrong but also the bigger picture and what valve is trying to do

>> 1. Some users have 0 access to the internet.
>
> Says on the box. Plus you can return the game.

WE BUY THE GAME TO PLAY IT NOT TO RETURN IT!!!!

>> 2. Some users like to resale their old games.
>
> Yes. It's a minor inconvenience that the account has to be sold with
> the game, I'll grant that. Hardly significant harm.

completely destroying the pc game 2nd hand market is insignificant
you know what is insignificant... your opinions!

>> 3. Some users only have 56k dialup connections.
>
> So turn off patching.

you're asking to be flamed...
but i'm containing myself cause its what you want... for me to explode
so you them can call me insane

buying a game entistles you to patch it!
you pay money you deserve respect and have access to any corrections
the product you bough needs!

>> 3a. Some of the above users pay by the min to be online (in the UK, AUS, and
>> some other countries?).
>
> So turn off patching.
>
> I still think the complainers fall in to one of the following
> categories 1) they're paranoid or 2) they're pirates or cheaters.
> Or both.

you really end up the perfect way
complete waste of time reading the trash you write
you are another insignificant steam lover, but you are those of the lower
kind... lower than you its impossible
you are the perfect example of what valve desires for their costumers
fortunately i'm sure you are one of a kind... and that's why i really
know valve and steam will fail... they made the mistake thinking every
one of us is like you, impaired crippled brainwashed hl2 fanatical

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html

 

[jeff]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <ohxMd.6112$sr1.5068@fe2.texas.rr.com>, "OldDog" <OldDog@citypound.com> wrote:

>If anyone has mentally been harmed by Steam, they need medical help. As to

Here I thought you grasped that "harm" needn't be physical. "Mental harm" can
be as simple as aggravation and frustration. That there are so many ways that
we can be "harmed" in this way is not a reason for Valve (or anyone else) to
pile on, as it were... it's certainly not why the consumer buys a product.


>financially harm, either attempt to sale the game to someone else, give it
>away as a present, send it back to Valve for refund, or chalk it up to life
>experience.

Yup... what else can you do. "Tough noogies."


>As in, never buy anything without researching it. In my case, been there,
>done that, been burnt, ....

... shouldn't have been burnt.

Ever read the "Selling It" page in Consumer Reports? It happens all the
time... and businesses get away with it all the time. Doesn't make it right.


>I've never had to regrister WinXP.
>But what info is required by MS?
>Name, address, ZIP, phone number, .... ?

Don't know. BTW, I don't like M$'s scheme either.


>> One thing I like about you "you OldDog" is that you do seem capable of
>> empathizing with others. The world would be a better place if this were a
>> more common trait.
>
>Maybe it's because this OldDog has had the fleas, been stepped on, kicked
>around, and forced to eat dog food. 😉

Is that a prescription for the rest of the world? ;-)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly difool <john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> Spake Unto All:

>i really hope you will always find time to post in this group and yes its
>such a waste of time reading the clority trash

"clority"?

>clority is insignificant and harmless cause what he represent is the
>worse of the worse steam lovers fanatics have to offer

I am insignificant and harmless because I represent the worst the
steam lover fanatics have to offer?

Why thank you.

Well, I have to admit that the fool is important and deserves
listening to, as he represents the very best the of the opposition.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly jeff@work.com (Jeff) Spake Unto All:

>>If anyone has mentally been harmed by Steam, they need medical help. As to
>
>Here I thought you grasped that "harm" needn't be physical. "Mental harm" can
>be as simple as aggravation and frustration.

Ie, when Jeff said "significant harm", he *really* meant
"non-significant not-actually-harmful annoyance".

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Jeff" <jeff@work.com> wrote in message
news:cu040v$mdf$1@cronkite.cc.uga.edu...
> In article <ohxMd.6112$sr1.5068@fe2.texas.rr.com>, "OldDog"
<OldDog@citypound.com> wrote:
>
> >If anyone has mentally been harmed by Steam, they need medical help. As
to
>
> Here I thought you grasped that "harm" needn't be physical.

I had it in my grasp. But my paws drop it.

> "Mental harm" can
> be as simple as aggravation and frustration. That there are so many ways
that
> we can be "harmed" in this way is not a reason for Valve (or anyone else)
to
> pile on, as it were... it's certainly not why the consumer buys a product.
>

I'm not sure that I totally agree with this.

I get frustrated when the Cardinals lose a baseball game.
I become aggravated when my wife wants me to watch the Home & Garden channel
with her.
But I don't feel that I need medical attention. Although my wife might
agrue with that.

I'll have to check and see what the definition of "mental harm" is. While
I can understand physical harm: cut your arm, rock hits your face, you
fall off a ladder and break a leg.... I'm struggling with what constitutes
"mental harm".


>
> >financially harm, either attempt to sale the game to someone else, give
it
> >away as a present, send it back to Valve for refund, or chalk it up to
life
> >experience.
>
> Yup... what else can you do. "Tough noogies."
>
>
> >As in, never buy anything without researching it. In my case, been
there,
> >done that, been burnt, ....
>
> .. shouldn't have been burnt.
>

Well I shouldn't have spent all my $ on beer and wine while I was in the
Navy.
I shouldn't have bought all that junk on my first credit card.
There's a lot of things we do out of desire, want, have to have, and
ignorance.

Finally after 50 years, I'm starting to realize a few things. 😉

> Ever read the "Selling It" page in Consumer Reports? It happens all the
> time... and businesses get away with it all the time. Doesn't make it
right.
>

Hey, I got a wife that loves to shop. And never wants to throw anything
away. You know anyone that wants to buy 3 hats that have a solar powered
cooling fan on them?

Hey. I might be stupid. But no way am I going to wear a hat that has a
fan on it which will make me look stupid.

>
> >I've never had to regrister WinXP.
> >But what info is required by MS?
> >Name, address, ZIP, phone number, .... ?
>
> Don't know. BTW, I don't like M$'s scheme either.
>
>
> >> One thing I like about you "you OldDog" is that you do seem capable of
> >> empathizing with others. The world would be a better place if this
were a
> >> more common trait.
> >
> >Maybe it's because this OldDog has had the fleas, been stepped on, kicked
> >around, and forced to eat dog food. 😉
>
> Is that a prescription for the rest of the world? ;-)

Dog food.
Yum! 😉

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Mean_Chlorine" <mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:v1o7015trv5ogqo8m1rnn6l83i9lkgbjns@4ax.com...
> Thusly jeff@work.com (Jeff) Spake Unto All:
<snip>
> >
> >Ask OldDog from whom he's heard many of those reasons before.
>
> Sure. Olddog, who gave you those points?
>

Ask me who the greatest baseball player is.

Answer: Woof!

(As in Babe Woof)


<snip>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 04 Feb 2005, Jeff wrote:

<snipped very good post dealing with the problem about steam>

> Actually, I did raise one which you, yet again, ignored or dismissed.
> What is pathetic is your attitude... and precisely why you're not worth my
> continued effort.

totally agree with you he's not worth your effort, but i hope you'll find
this group worth staying and keep posting, cause you are probably the most
consistent, regular and dedicated poster, we who question valve have

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 04 Feb 2005, Mean_Chlorine wrote:

> Thing is, Jeff refuses to divulge what's wrong with steam. He wants me

lie! total and outrageous lie! unless your news server cuts 99% of what
Jeff writes and in this case please change servers or you are impaired
and can "compute" everything you read so you miss most of his posts

> to *guess* why he thinks steam is evil. Even when OldDog bailed him

olddog is pro-steam, there cannot be more pro-steam than he but lately
he's been reasonable and doesn't want what you and others are defending
that everyone should accept steam without question
he likes steam but he doesn't want to FORCE it to those who don't like
he's being fair, something you never was or never will be

> However, he's not a psychotic babbling halfwit, like you.

i'm sorry to say but you are not in Jeff's league
i completely agree with Jeff, its a waste of time replying to you
you steam lover have to pick another one from you who will give a real
fight and not like your stupid "deny everything" posts, cause Jeff is
rigorous, serious and extremely fair

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly "OldDog" <OldDog@citypound.com> Spake Unto All:

>> >Ask OldDog from whom he's heard many of those reasons before.
>>
>> Sure. Olddog, who gave you those points?
>
>Ask me who the greatest baseball player is.
>
>Answer: Woof!
>
>(As in Babe Woof)

Good boy! <pats head & gives biscuit>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly difool <john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> Spake Unto All:

>> Thing is, Jeff refuses to divulge what's wrong with steam. He wants me
>
>lie! total and outrageous lie!

I think everyone are capable of determining how much of a lie that is.

>> to *guess* why he thinks steam is evil. Even when OldDog bailed him
>
>olddog is pro-steam, there cannot be more pro-steam than he

Yeah, OldDog is the ultimate pro steam fanboi. Positively rabid. Isn't
that right, OldDog?

>but lately
>he's been reasonable and doesn't want what you and others are defending
>that everyone should accept steam without question
>he likes steam but he doesn't want to FORCE it to those who don't like
>he's being fair, something you never was or never will be

More inane babbling. I *think* you're saying that the difference
betwee me and him is that he doesn't want to hold a gun to peoples
heads and force them to play Half-Life 2. Which isn't an accurate
rendition of either of our positions.
Although perhaps it is in your world, wherever that is.

>> However, he's not a psychotic babbling halfwit, like you.
>
>i'm sorry to say but you are not in Jeff's league

True. I am totally out of Jeffs league.

>i completely agree with Jeff, its a waste of time replying to you
>you steam lover have to pick another one from you who will give a real
>fight and not like your stupid "deny everything" posts, cause Jeff is
>rigorous, serious and extremely fair

There you go again, inanely babbling away, like a radio noone listens
to.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Mean_Chlorine" <mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:vdf901l9hq7cacjdfhph4h9g026f6ab8rq@4ax.com...
<snip>
> >olddog is pro-steam, there cannot be more pro-steam than he
>
> Yeah, OldDog is the ultimate pro steam fanboi. Positively rabid. Isn't
> that right, OldDog?
>

OldDog is Pro-OldDog. If it's good for me, it's good for the dog pound.
But it doesn't mean that its good for the other cats out there. 😉

<snip>

 

[jeff]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <v1o7015trv5ogqo8m1rnn6l83i9lkgbjns@4ax.com>, Mean_Chlorine
<mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Thusly jeff@work.com (Jeff) Spake Unto All:
>
>>>No, I asked, and I can repeat the question, in what way does Steam
>>>cause significant harm to the customer?
>>
>>Steam unnecessarily forces the paying customer to give up his/her anonymity in
>
>>order to validate the purchase. (I listed this in my previous post (point 5)
>>and you conveniently ignored it. Then again, I'm sure you don't find this
>>reason "significant" either.)

Re-read the above.


>>Steam forces non-internet-connected users to go to some rather extreme lengths
>
>>to be able to install, patch, and play a single-player game. The lengths are
>>less extreme for dialup users, but not painless either.
>
>"Significant harm"?

"Significant harm" is subjective, and many people will feel "harmed" by what
Valve has done with Steam... and to get back to my original point, Valve is
doing so for selfish reasons that have nothing to do with single-player
gameplay.

I finally get it now. You don't care about the issues at all. You're just
here to deflect the debate by continually nitpicking "significant harm" and
baiting with your insults. You're trolling.


>>>Would you be able to if you had a 56K dialup? If the answer is yes...
>>
>>The answer is I can download it from someone else's BB connection (without
>>their needing to have Steam installed too) and carry it home on a CDRW
>
>Isn't this procedure exactly what you called "rather extreme lengths"
>above?

No, the extreme lengths was having to lug your computer (50-100 lbs.) to
someone's house, not a 5 oz. CDRW, which he could take and deliver at any
convenient meeting place. The idea of having to carry your computer to a
friend's house was Valve's, BTW.


>>For the record, dialup isn't necessarily a 56K connection either, even with a
>>56K modem. Many dialup users cannot get better than 26-28K connections simply
>
>>because of where they live.
>
>Which means they may have to wait 20, perhaps even 30 minutes before
>they get to play. The horror!

If patches are ever greater than 20M, the wait will be hours. If they ever go
Steam-only, the wait would be DAYS, probably even weeks.


>>>And again you fail to produce a single argument. You didn't even make
>>>effective use the ones olddog gave you. Pathetic.
>>
>>Actually, I did raise one which you, yet again, ignored or dismissed.

>But you're not going to tell me what it was, right?

I did point it out. See above.

 

[jeff]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <NXYMd.11875$sr1.9598@fe2.texas.rr.com>, "OldDog" <OldDog@citypound.com> wrote:

>I get frustrated when the Cardinals lose a baseball game.
>I become aggravated when my wife wants me to watch the Home & Garden channel
>with her.
>But I don't feel that I need medical attention. Although my wife might
>agrue with that.

I never said (nor implied) that "harm" required medical attention. That was
yours.


>I'll have to check and see what the definition of "mental harm" is. While
>I can understand physical harm: cut your arm, rock hits your face, you
>fall off a ladder and break a leg.... I'm struggling with what constitutes
>"mental harm".

I think we're wasting a lot of effort on a nitpicked word. Perhaps there's a
better term? Injury? Wrong? Whatever. The meaning, I think, was plain
enough. You can pick this apart with literalness (to the point of being
obtuse about it) or you can debate the issues.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly jeff@work.com (Jeff) Spake Unto All:

>>>Steam unnecessarily forces the paying customer to give up his/her anonymity

You've screwed up the levels, but apparently you want me to respond to
the above, which clearly is the core of your beef with steam.

OK, fair enough: is giving an email account *really* giving up
anonymity?
'Cause I don't.

And are you *really* confusing anonymity with integrity?
'Cause I'm not.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:20:39 +0100, Walter Mitty
<mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>What IS his gripe with one time online validation?

Someone blanked your memory recently, or are you once again just
acting stupid? Why do you act as if this hasn't been discussed million
times already?

And it is not "one time online validation" either. You'd have to do it
again whenever you re-install Steam/HL2. You know, when people e.g.
re-install Windows, or upgrade their PC? Happens every now and then.

But of course you wouldn't know that, since you are acting stupid
again.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

On 2 Feb 2005 05:35:09 -0800, "Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>> In addition to removing the need to validate your game online when
>you
>> install it or play it for the first time. Maybe giving a choice even,
>> those who don't want to have a CD check can validate it online (this
>> would remove the CD check), while those who prefer not validating it
>> ever, have to put up with the CD checks. I would be fine with an
>> option like that.
>
>If they do that, could you copy the CD and post it to me?

Maybe, just like you can do with numerous other PC games where CD
checks were removed with a patch.

But anyway, I admit there's a logical error there. Instead, maybe they
should keep the Steam-only version as the "authentication required"
version, and the retail version as the CD check version.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 01:57:17 +0100, Mean_Chlorine
<mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>Thusly jeff@work.com (Jeff) Spake Unto All:
>
>>>>>So, Steam is harming the consumer significantly HOW, exactly?
>>>>
>>>>And exactly HOW many times do you need the arguments against Steam listed??
>>>
>>>Try ONCE.
>>>So, how does steam "significantly harm the consumer"?
>>
>>Try reading any of the many posts here that've already done so. Sheesh.
>
>You know, "Jeff", I'm starting to think you can't detail *any*.
>Prove me wrong.

I just listed them for you and Jeff, from my point of view. Please
print them out this time so you can read them again after your
bi-weekly memory erasure.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 11:50:38 +0100, Mean_Chlorine
<mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>>2. Some users like to resale their old games.
>
>Yes. It's a minor inconvenience that the account has to be sold with
>the game, I'll grant that. Hardly significant harm.

Wrong. You don't seem to know at all what you are talking about. A
couple of points:

1. If you sell your Steam account, you lose all your other Steam games
on that account in the process. You can't transfer individual Steam
games between accounts afterwards, besides the HL2 retail version, if
you are arsed to send $10 and your HL2 CD jewel case to Valve (LOL!
Talk about "minor inconvenience". Maybe compared having to sleep on a
bed of nails?).

2. Even if you take all the hassle creating a separate account for
EACH Steam game you ever buy, there's still the issue that you can't
change your Steam account ID. This is a MAJOR hassle if you start
having several Steam accounts, each with one Steam game, and each
account with some obscure Steam ID that someone else came up with.

3. Oh, and Steam EULA forbids you from selling your account, and Valve
has publicly stated that they will ban second-hand Steam accounts.

>>4. Some users are concerned that down the road, Valve will go out of
>>business, and if they ever go to "reinstall" HL2, they'll be hosed (to put
>>it politely).
>
>Hypothetical. Just like the hypothetical patch Valve might release
>prior to going down.

People buy insurances for hypothetical situations. Fools!

PC game companies come and go, so it is far from unthinkable,
especially in the case of a two-hit wonder like Valve.

It is also quite uncommon for game developers to do ANYTHING for games
that will not bring them any more money. Where's the support for Motor
City Online?

>I still think the complainers fall in to one of the following
>categories 1) they're paranoid or 2) they're pirates or cheaters.
>Or both.

I think the people who say that fall into three categories: 1) stupid,
2) ignorant and 3) blind.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

riku wrote:
>
> But anyway, I admit there's a logical error there. Instead, maybe
they
> should keep the Steam-only version as the "authentication required"
> version, and the retail version as the CD check version.

Then send me a copy of the retail version.

A CD-check can only validate that the disc matches the key code. A
million people could be using that same code and playing single-player
with it.
Registering your key code centrally means that whenever you go online
to play multiplayer or to download patches, only the original
registrant can have access to the extra content. There is absolutely no
point in duplicating the CD or the key code. Big stroke against piracy.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Mean_Chlorine" <mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:buqf019ta9b7mal5iqa8sr7ioo12t5ts5l@4ax.com...

> >>>Steam unnecessarily forces the paying customer to give up his/her
anonymity
> You've screwed up the levels, but apparently you want me to respond to
> the above, which clearly is the core of your beef with steam.
>
> OK, fair enough: is giving an email account *really* giving up
> anonymity?
> 'Cause I don't.

Since you don't seem to know any better... ANY personal info you have to
surrender is giving up your anonymity. Only somebody who is clueless would
state otherwise.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107882872.869507.11940@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> A CD-check can only validate that the disc matches the key code. A
> million people could be using that same code and playing single-player
> with it.
> Registering your key code centrally means that whenever you go online
> to play multiplayer or to download patches, only the original
> registrant can have access to the extra content. There is absolutely no
> point in duplicating the CD or the key code. Big stroke against piracy.

Good for Valve but far too draconian for the end user. You seem to be
entirely missing customer goodwill in all of this. Yes it may cut down on a
few copies that wouldn't ordinarily be copied, but why should the paying
customer have sympathy for Valve / Steam when a pirate can just download and
run the game with absolutely no Steam-manufactured hassle? Just how music
companies had to tell everybody why they should have to buy a $14 album to
get one song, Valve needs to give incentive to buy this game instead of
pirate it and Steam makes that argument entirely in the other direction.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

"riku" wrote

> But anyway, I admit there's a logical error there. Instead, maybe they
> should keep the Steam-only version as the "authentication required"
> version, and the retail version as the CD check version.
>
CD check has been removed due to bugs in securom code

- Peter

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.half-life (More info?)

riku wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:20:39 +0100, Walter Mitty
> <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>What IS his gripe with one time online validation?
>
>
> Someone blanked your memory recently, or are you once again just
> acting stupid? Why do you act as if this hasn't been discussed million
> times already?
>
> And it is not "one time online validation" either. You'd have to do it
> again whenever you re-install Steam/HL2. You know, when people e.g.
> re-install Windows, or upgrade their PC? Happens every now and then.
>
> But of course you wouldn't know that, since you are acting stupid
> again.
>
Don't be an idiot. Any smart person would have made backups of the Steam
GCF files. After an install all you need to do is pop them back in their
original place and they'll work, since they've already been activated
and updates.

Do you really think you know better that others? Idiot.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 16:17:05 -0000, "redTed" <redted@nthellworld.com>
wrote:

>Apart from our memory issues, you completely and utterly miss the point that
>we don't find the above "problems" serious enough to warrant missing out on
>a great gaming experience.

Your complete lack of objectivity noted. That was not news.

So, because you don't find them to be a problem for you personally,
they shouldn't be to anyone? How stupid and arrogant is that?