Hmm.  Ok so we might be miners digging from opposite sides on this one.  I think there are two separate points to clarify.  
1) I agree that we have two competing systems of measurement, and I don't mind them both being on the same page.  I guess we just have to decide which is the "default" (by which a monarch moves or is placed above/below a near neighbour).  Basically, I feel that if we had two dead monarchs whose reigns were VERY close to each other, but where the absolute days conflicted with years/days, we should have years/days override absolute days and perhaps include a footnote to draw attention to the overlap.  Anything else would appear like a mistake.  I've just checked, and so far, none of our close ties present too much of a conflict for now.

2) What to do when Bhumibol, Elizabeth, and Tuanku approach another monarch in table one.  My feeling is that these problems are unique, momentary events that resolve themselves:  once a monarch "in motion" (alive) passes a monarch "in stasis" (dead!), they move up the list.  The problem at stake (and this happens only a few times a year) is precisely WHEN to move them.  Since they don't move up automatically (one of us does it manually), we are bound to be inaccurate:  I'm in the Central time zone of North America, so WHEN exactly did Bhumibol surpass Victoria - his time zone, hers, mine - and if I change it in the evening versus the morning, what day does that constitute?  To be honest, we usually make changes when we think to check the page and manually move a monarch.  I'm okay with that.