agree about present tense. kudos for making it through two, i've never been able to get through one. okay, i admit it, i've never even *seen* one, to be honest. short stories are okay, but i've always viewed present tense as an experiment for most writers.
a slight expansion on 'dracula,' not only was it written as journal/diary passages, but also as letters, new clippings, phonographic diaries (van helsing), and ships logs. probably a good 80-90%, afair, are in journal/diary form, but there are other ways stoker got the story across, too, not necessarily 100% what you'd call first-person. i mention that only to illustrate that even a first-person story can have some elbow room to a certain extent. (it's also been noted that 'dracula's terror comes from the creature *not* being around. i'd have to reread it to see if i agree or not.)
like rabe, i'd have to say i'm a semi-purist in that a first person shouldn't have the narrator die. it *could*, and it would be gimmicky, but that's not always a terrible thing. i've only really seen the gimmick work in short stories or in the hands of a pro, and even then there's a sort of unsatisfied part of me that walks away from it in the end. if someone can do it well, great, go for it. otherwise, if there's no point to it, why limit your audience? it's like one of those stories with nothing but dialogue. i'm sure those have been published and there are probably some good ones, but, boy, i have to be desperate to plod through one.