I don't see a problem with asking about play style or flavor preferences, but I think the key is to phrase each potential answer (if you want to make it multiple choice) the way a person of that play preference would phrase it. (as opposed to an obnoxious strawman of their possible answer such as you see in a regretable number of polls on play style). The easy way to do that is to pick a style question, pose it to a varied group of reasonably articulate games (like you have here for instance) and use some of their responses.
btw, one odd thing I noticed about one of your rules. You say that every player should
expect their character to die, and pretty much dis anyone who doesn't like meat grinder campaigns with "try to be mature about it." But later and in another thread, you laid out your actual rules on character death, which seem designed so that a well run character in a reasonably cooperative group probably
shouldn't expect to die except in extraordinary circumstances, and if a character does die casually there may have been some in or out of character pettiness responsible for it. It seems like your rules actively misrepresent your play style, and (unless you have a really petty group) may drive away the players who could enjoy and contribute to a campaign run under such rules. Why not actually include those death rules along with a clear statement that, for instance, you don't change enemies mid combat even if the group is overwhellmed and there will be times when running away real fast is the better part of living? Why try to make your group appealing to those who play disposable characters when your rules seem to support long term character building?
