No. A few years ago Jeskai wouldn't have been fast enough to exist in pauper. The format has slowed down a lot. There are fast decks but there are many slow, grindy decks too (jeskai, mbc, teachings, drake to some extent).
No. This statement, aside from being too generic to apply to a diverse metagame, actually applies to very few pauper decks. Affinity is often dumping Enforcers turn 3, izzet blitz is blitzing turn 3, Ninja of the Deep Hours may have decided the game by then. On the other end: Mulldrifter? Drake? Gary?
This is just a made up number.
Yes, but only to a certain degree. Too many cheap removal spells can be dead in the late game. Exclude is a great card, but maybe not as a 4-of.
No. This ignores the presence (and the necessity) of cards like Crypt Rats, Electrickery, Evincar's Justice, etc. These cards are a very important part of the format.
No. Your example for #4 breaks rule #6. It's also just not true. It may be true if worded differently, but I don't think "all cards must [x]" statements are useful. Your definition is even less useful.
No. Drake decks (without tron) aren't cheating. MBC isn't cheating. Jeskai isn't cheating.
Okay. But this isn't pauper specific.
No. Card advantage, first of all, usually doesn't take the form of pure card draw in this format. Secondly, every color has access to it and you can't just say things are "important" or "at a premium". It doesn't mean anything without reasoning. Things that are important according to your list: curve card advantage versatility efficiency speed resilience consistency
Okay. Here's the problem. Cards don't fit into all of these categories. Decks may ignore some of these qualities and still be good. And they often conflict (speed and card advantage, for example) so what does it mean to be "important"? They also tend to be relative, so without comparison to format specific examples how does one use any of this? In Commander I could say "card advantage is important" but that means something completely different.
Incoherent.
Incoherent.
Guildgates? FYI we have lifegain duals. This only really applies to decks trying to be the beatdown though. Plenty of archetypes run 2 or 3 colors.
No. Even expensive pauper decks are cheap compared to other formats. Rotation is only one reason to not commit to a deck forever. It's not the only reason. It doesn't follow that every eternal format means sticking to one deck.
True. Is this philosophy?
No. As already stated, this doesn't apply. Many format staples fail this test. Flame Slash isn't even that prominent, thanks to drake.
This is restating #9
Incoherent
No. Depends on the deck.
If your definition of "key card" is: a creature, then sure. If you're talking about izzet blitz or bogles that's because they are considered aggro/combo decks and most people make a distinction between them and traditional aggro.