Ok, read the whole topic.
It seems that you've constructed these imaginary rules that restrict your play and ability to win, and you expect other people to be bind by the same rules. It doesn't work like that. People, especially on-line, cannot know what you expect of the game and what do you find "fair". Even if they did, why would they care? They play to win not to make you feel good.
Moreover, the game doesn't care how you won. It doesn't give points for style or elegancy or fairness or whatever. You win the same whether you bought the last province on turn 32 in a slog or you emptied the whole supply turn 4.
Most importantly, where do you draw the line?
First, how do you define "no piledriving early"? How early is too early? No provinces bought? one province? two? Than, if that is not fair, why is opening Mountebank/Chapel or Mint/Fool's Gold on 5/2 opening fair? Isn't that exploiting luck too? How about drawing your Treasure maps both on turn 5? If you play them, is that exploiting the luck too? You may say it's not, and MIGHT think it is. Now, what makes you right and not me? I might feel it's very unfair and that you are exploiting your luck. Same goes to your little 'rule'. It is impossible to make adopt one universal rule of subjective "fairness". If it is in the rules, it's fair. Making subjective, superfluous rules will make playing the game impossible if everybody is playing what they theselves feel "fair", and expect everybody else to obey. You'll end up with game where nobody is allowed to buy a village along with 2 torturers cause double torturer chain is unfair, unfun and doesn't let the other person play out their deck.