I am pointing out vendors which I believe are insecure. If I post a name I believe is insecure, that is open to challenge from the likes of astor who I consider a good friend. Everything I post is open to be challenged and I will accept other opinions on the matter as to what is or isn't secure practice, there is no perfect set of guidelines on it but the best we can do is debate it by bringing what I believe to be bad practice to the front stage.I am not forcing anyone to do anything, other than pointing out things which in my own belief and knowledge constitute insecure practice. I am not an idealist I just have to do the best I can with what I have and if people find it helpful so be it, if they want to completely ignore me, that is also their choice which I have no right in telling them otherwise. If however I list a vendor here with insecure practice and it dissuades a buyer from using them as they feel insecure, I am sure they would thank me for that at least if I managed to point out something they didn't realise. Let us not forget I am working off publicly-available information and I will note what I feel is the "problem" in the security of each vendor and therefore people can make their own conclusions so this is not a witch hunt, rather observations in my judgement and I will put the result to you for your own interpretation. But for all the libertarianism crap now being said about my actions, I couldn't care less, I am not a libertarian and if you feel my actions somehow violate a vendors right to whatever, then does that not infringe upon my right to make observations and let people make their own conclusion - it works both ways.