It's the agreeing to check it down that is a problem, not the checking it down.
Good written rules avoid a lot of arguments. In my 30+ years of playing, I've seen several rules arguments lead to the end of a game. Most of those could have been prevented by good written rules. That's why we have somewhat lengthy written rules, with WSOP, TDA, RRoP, and WSOP Dealer's Guide, as back up rules. Some new players are concerned about how many rules we have, but after they come, they won't be. We are more concerned with the spirit of the rules as opposed to the letter of the rules. Here's an example that came up last night.
We play with two decks, two rotating dealers, and there is little time between hands. After the flop, all players folded except the bettor. The next deck isn't quite ready to deal. Someone asks to rabbit hunt (specifically prohibited but not strictly enforced). Pot sent to winner, then rabbit hunt carried out. No harm to anyone and if it slows the game down, it's only by a couple of seconds. Basically, no blood, no foul, and no one complaining. That happened at the final table.
Same exact dealer, earlier in the game. Same situation except the next dealer is ready to deal. Rabbit hunting not allowed. No one complains.
My dealers have used good judgment about whether to allow rabbit hunting and don't in situations where it slows the game down. Until it gets to be a problem, I expect enforcement will continue as it does now -- not allowed most of the time, rarely asked for, but allowed on occasion.
Rules are supposed to make your game more orderly, prevent arguments, and give the TD something upon which to make a decision if an issue comes up.
I see home poker as being very different from bar league poker and casino poker, and for that matter, a casino night event put on by the high school reunion (or any other group). We want to prohibit cheating and have an orderly game. We want to keep pleasant players in the game so we want it fun. It's not a business. At the same time, several of us are highly competitive. From time to time we have a player who hates rabbit hunting at the game and he will say something. We won't do it while he's at the table. Our rules will be strictly enforced if a player requests it and it's their right to request it.
Now rabbit hunting isn't the same as cheating. I sometimes have a dealer who will lay out the flop, turn, and river. I will talk to them privately and reemphasize why we don't allow that. I've found once it's explained, they don't do it again, unless they forget. If they repeatedly keep doing that, they won't continue to deal. That's not cheating, but it can give a player an advantage (like if they've noticed a flaw in a particular card). That's why there is a burn card.
Not all rules have the same purpose. Some are there to prevent cheating. Some are there to provide order. Some that are designed to provide order might sometimes prevent cheating too. Some are written traditions about the way things are done though a different way wouldn't harm anything. I'd be careful about saying someone who violated a rule to provide order was cheating. They weren't. It's not the same.