Title says it all.

I do. I avoid unwanted patches, guarantee I can still play if my ISP goes down and keep Steam from logging and displaying my gaming activity. As to the last, my friends don't REALLY need to know I spent 63 hours playing Skyrim in the past two weeks now, do they?

Sometimes, though as an function it's the most stupid thing I have ever seen. Simply because being OFFLINE in steam requires you to be connected to the INTERNET.

First going into Offline Mode, yes. Staying in it, no.

I've never gone into Offline Mode, so my answer is no.

Nope. I don't really have a reason to.

Yeah i do,just in case my internet goes down for whatever reason plus it lets me control when i update my games.

I did until dishonored because cloud is what is used to save settings and the game etc.

IF your concern is keeping a specific version of Skyrim there is a solution that allows to keep steam in online without worrying about an auto patch.
Google: Skyrim Unplugged

I don't bother unless there's an update I'm actively trying to avoid.

When my internet connection is down my Steam games still work fine.

Nope.

Unless I'm downloading a game, yes.

I own two laptops, my home laptop is always Online when I play any Steam Game. My Laptop I use for work and travel only goes online to get updated.

Nope. I always appear online when I'm online.

Nein.

I have no reason to. I'm not afraid of updates and I actually like Steam.

Unlike some folks, I'm not paranoid that an update will bork a game. Hell, I'm an active tester for software in general. If something breaks, I generally fix it myself if I can. If not, I've got my own rollback methods.

Also, Steam works just fine when my Internet goes down. I've never had a single problem with Steam or any game on Steam. Until I do, there's no reason at all for me to go offline unless my Internet goes down and out for the count.

Only if i'm avoiding a patch. The broadband i have is very relieable, so there's no need to prepare for an internet outage.

This new Skyrim patch caught me by surprise though, but little harm done, only the map mode broke

Paranoia isn't the only reason to want to block an update. Utilities that are built against a certain version of a binary file will break if they can't retain binary compatibility, and many will check version numbers and simply refuse to work with a binary with the wrong version number. I've blocked many an update to a Bethesda game because I'm using script extenders that won't work until they're updated for the new version of the .exe.

It's also worth noting that not everyone out there is a software-savvy geek like some of us are and/or don't want to have to roll-back, work-around, or otherwise try to fix their games.

Only when I'm not connected to the internet, it goes into offline mode automatically in that case. Unfortunately offline mode doesn't save time played or achievements, so it messes up my stats.

I said "some".

I've seen a lot of folks avoid patches due to thinking it makes a game run worse without having any evidence to back it up.

When it comes to utilities, I just do without them until they're updated. I've designed my own to specifically not have to be re-coded unless something drastically changes.

While I don't happen to be one of those people I can't say I blame them. It's not all that uncommon for an update to make an undesirable change to the way a game runs. Anyway, not worth arguing about. I say that people can do whatever makes them feel comfortable unless it totally doesn't make sense.

That's great in cases where a utility is only dealing with resource and config files. If it needs to actually map to memory addresses (like a script extender) forcing it to work with the wrong version of a binary could cause a lot of serious problems. You can't really design your program around that. There's no way to know how things have changed from one version to the next, so unless the binary is in some kind of self-describing format (like managed IL assemblies and things like that) your program isn't really safe to use until you update it to work with the new binary.

Yep, I realize that. I was speaking on general terms, as many utilities, not just the ones handling the memory stuff, hard-code everything.

As for the former, yep. Best not to get into that. I'm just speaking from my experiences and observations, is all.

I usually did. But for the past year or so I've been using Steam normally more and more. I guess I've grown more interest in knowing how much time I've spent/wasted on a game, which is something Steam measure in online mode.

Steam hours in the CT is something like 12 or 14...real hours in the hundreds. I dislike and distrust steam, just look at the threads today with all the people that got "forced" steam updates. But the worse part is that steam is getting everyone under 20 use to the idea of being watched and probed and to the idea that you only RENT your software now. So when they grow up, use other programs like health care or other personal and serious programs they will not think anything of it.

So... like the fact that you rent the OS, the games (even if you don't buy them from Steam) and all the other software you supposedly own?

Don't get me wrong, I don't like it either, but to insinuate that Valve / Steam was the first to do the whole "you don't own this software" is disingenuous.

I go offline. The launch and the ads are annoying. I go online only when there is a game patch or I am purchasing DLC.

Have a bit more faith in the next generation. We're not all dumb as rocks.

My understanding of that situation is that people got used to the tracking, achievements, etc. with their consoles and Valve added those things because some people actually wanted it. To date there's no evidence of Valve using anyone's information for anything nefarious, collecting personal information from peoples' computers without their knowledge, etc. that I know of. Believe me, if Valve were doing that someone would be onto them by now with the amount of scrutiny that Steam gets. It is possible to detect that type of thing, you know.

From a business standpoint it would be suicide for Valve to get caught doing something disingenuous with their client, so I really doubt they're doing that or ever will. What could they be doing that would be profitable enough to risk the reputation of their entire platform? While I agree that people don't protect their privacy anywhere close to as well as they should, I really don't think that Steam makes the short list of things people should be concerned about.

I agree that the speed of the client startup is annoying. You can turn off everything else, though. I never see ads or update news.