for the following reasons:
One, that policy seems to punish those who know how to play well. It seems I should either play worse strategically so I CON death so I can get on the pillar, or play for such a period of time (700 plus hours if you have leader life, etc) which I know for a fact most of those on the pillar did not do. In addition Gre had leader constitution from somewhere at about 220 hours on up to 360 hours. So for 140 hours of Gre's life I was losing 1/5 of a con per death instead of 1/3. My con was 13 when I deleted, which included at least 7 or 8 trains into con. Yet from what I have heard I maintained a very good pk ratio, somewhere in the area of 75%. So in essense because I played so well for such a long period of time, I am not allowed on the pillar because I didn't die enough or play to age death.

Two, the pillar should be there for those who did something great for the village. I was disappointed that Goapa was not on the pillar either despite 450 hours of play, curing the village of a massive blight and putting the Minaclar to rest. In fact I was well on my way to con death, which I wanted, and for some reason you gave me more con to deal with, which was absolutely opposite of what I wanted :).

Third, it penalizes people who cannot play at certain points in the year, i.e. exams. What really scared me is that you uninducted someone for not showing up when I saw them the day before you uninducted them (and he was on for about six hours). So it was either delete honorably, leaving the village in a good position, or start doing the log on once a week thing which ends up destroying the village. Honestly which one would you rather have happened?

Fourth, getting on the pillar is an IC kind of thing, but it is instead treated with OOC factors, i.e. how you died.

Anyway, my thoughts on the subject. But since you lay out the rules on the subject, I can't really say or do anything.

THanks again for the opportunity. I'll send off my description to you as soon as I can.

Gre