Recently, some researchers in the community of answer set programming introduced the notions of subjective constraint monotonicity, epistemic splitting, and foundedness for epistemic logic programs, aiming to use them as main criteria/intuitions to compare different answer set semantics proposed in the literature on how they comply with these intuitions. In this note we demonstrate that these three properties are too strong and may exclude some desired answer sets/world views. Therefore, such properties should not be used as necessary conditions for answer set semantics.