Suppose I have found two or even more proofs of a theorem and I prepare a paper on it. Is it considered to be a good practice to write down all of them? Or is it considered to be my job as an author to select the best one (which can be a tricky task!) and omit the other ones? What about a compromise, such as including a remark which sketches the alternative proofs? If your answer depends on additional information, what are relevant criteria which decide if the alternative proofs are included? For example, is it OK to include an alternative proof even if the proof follows a similar idea, albeit doesn't use as much machinery and hence is accessible for more readers, even though it is not as elegant? In my opinion, all proofs should be included because they offer a different perspective on the same thing, which I think is always a good thing, but I don't know if there is a standard common practice. Does this perhaps even depend on the journal where the paper is published?

Edit: Please post your answers as answers, not in the comment section. ;)