I was not implying one should do otherwise. I was just pointing out that servers that respond to GET will not always respond to HEAD as expected. Some sites treat it the same as GET. Others may not allow it. For example, Amazon responds with 405 MethodNotAllowed.
Anyway, it looks like they fixed the problem or I was mistaken.
I will need to find another example.
Meanwhile looking on stackexchange one can still see people running websites asking whether to block or "turn off" HEAD as recently as last year.
If a user expects every website to respond properly to a HEAD request, then the user might be occasionally "surprised". This is because not every person running a website understands or agrees how HEAD can be useful. Sadly, GET is the only method that a user can expect to work on across all websites.
Some httpds treat them the same -- they still send the file after HEAD requests instead of only the headers.