If you made consistent gains each and every month without fail, I would question your level of current development.
A deload is taken around the time when gains generally stall, not when it says so on paper. Anyone with some decent experience knows the difference between overtraining and just needing extra rest or whatever. A deload (or lighter training) is taken based on past experiences and time frames (the times when strength gains slowed down dramatically)...not just an arbitrary number you picked out your ass.
It's pretty narrow minded to think that they're just making it up - if I get better results from alternating high intensity weeks with "easier/deload/active training" periods, why would I NOT have them? If I get to the point where I've pushed so hard, training 6 days a week, eating 6000 cals every day for over a year, pushed intensity to the max and reached a sticking point...who are you to tell me that I don't need an active recovery period when it's worked so well for me and plenty others?
It's very much a lifestyle/genetic/age thing too. Someone in their late teens/early twenties with lessor responsibilities usually can cope better with training without needing lighter periods or whatever. Same applies for those with good genetics/recovery abilities too.
As for the OP, I was just throwing that one out there for the sake of being a little bit helpful. Though, 10 years of little progress doesn't sound promising...