JackofWands
If you're studying alone then I agree, up to a point. (It could potentially make learning a lot more time consuming than has to be though. Why reinvent the wheel?)
If you think you can make a better wheel, or at least one that serves your purposes more efficiently.
But if one is working within the confines of a specific teaching structure or initiatory school then you really should conform yourself to their approach, or leave.
I absolutely agree with this. No one has the right to walk into an OTO meeting and demand that everyone else change their model. If you want to deviate from tradition, you do so on your own. But at the same time, neither would the OTO have the right to demand of individual non-members who were studying Qabalah that they alter their approach to fit OTO standards.
One of the valuable features of a common Qabalistic model is that it facilitates the sharing of information and understanding between diverse people. In a way it's like a shared language. But this process is made all the more difficult if you're having to "translate" concepts between various idiosyncratic, personal models. And that's assuming the 'other party' is willing to learn your personal 'language' in the first place.
Once again, I completely agree. In speaking about Qabalistic concepts with other people, it makes much more sense to work within a common framework, or at the very least to acknowledge that common framework and discuss it as the standard even if one's personal practice deviates from it. This is another reason that, even though I work with a different, personalized system, I would still encourage everyone to learn the Kircher Tree.