Nice piece, your post. Really nice. It accurately shows your position and skills (IMHO^[WTF]). You are a consultant, not a coder. Would you be the latter, you'd have come up with something to just silence your critics. A small, succinct piece of code, just to tell them to STFU. You didn't, 'cause your are a consultant. That's fine, consultants are needed sometimes to get people out of their narrow view and be helped to soar eagle-like over the broad picture, whilst having, as an eagle has, a keen eye for the smallest details. But what happens here?

Coder (random PerlMonk) : I have a problem implementing this algorithm considering X, Y and Z. The issue is here (points to code)
Consultant (sundialsvc4): Problems with implementing algorithms are known since the times of the PDP11, mostly due to memory constraints and user boundaries... (blah, blah... disgressing) ...and the 31 bit integer of S390 later... Solaris 1 and management/coder interaction... (blah, blah, blather...)
Coder: ok, got that. Have some solution? Any hint?
Consultant: first, you should do a ORM design of your overall architecture and draw explicit Venn-diagrams for your database queries, because blah, blah, blather...
Coder: -.-

See? People come here to learn Perl. People stay here to teach perl, and to learn more perl. This is a site about real perl issues and real perl problems and real programming, and not a site for seeking advice of a consultant or giving advice as such. Sadly, not.

Code examples are necessary, because: "There is no other way of teaching than by example, and if it so must be, as a bad one." (Einstein)

...every object should be entitled to assume that its creation-time parameters have been checked. (In Perl, it is much safer IMHO to do this before instantiating the object, rather than to do it in the constructor.)

This, IMHO, is as wrong as wrong can be. It goes against Postel's Law. Soaring as a consultant eagle above the low levels of cranking out code, you should update your maps. Otherwise, your counsel is of no use at best, detrimetal at worst.