>  I'd prefer one option and comment and a statement that explains
> what are the other options. makes sense? Besides we have the other example that runs all options
> so I think it's enough. ok?

OK. I was worried that the other example looks bad (the max-power orientation was just a flat line), so wasn't a good representation of the new functionality, but it works much better when the middle eigenvector is used, so I'll just revert the second example and add a comment as you suggested.