[Governance Poll Proposal] Have stricter rules for harassment and insults in the sub

The case/problem

Three months ago, on 8/Jan, an user in the sub, let's say X, was temporarily banned for 3 days for calling another user, let's say Y, a "fcking rtard". This user apologized and said they would do better. 14 days ago, on 21/Mar, the same user called Y a "r*tard" again, and then edited the original comment to remove this part, but included a "that guy is a hater and will be inside mods DMs asking how close to the hole to kiss".

To that matter, there were three faults:

Calling Y a "f*cking r*tard"

Calling Y a "r*tard" again

Editing the comment on fault 2 and including a statement saying that Y "will be inside mods DMs asking how close to the hole to kiss".

On the second fault, a temp ban was issued. After he edited his comment and included the third fault, a permaban was issued.

Such permaban was a matter of debate/split opinions within the mod team, on the premise that permabans have only been awarded in cases of scam, spam, doxxing etc., but that insults should be under the right of free speech, and therefore a temporary ban would be enough, or as many temporary bans as faults committed, but never a perma.

The arguments against the current policy and the proposal for change

The user in question had a first temp ban, promised they would adjust their conduct but ultimately did not;

By not issuing a perma directly, more than one opportunity was given to such user;

Harassing, bullying, intimidating, or abusing an individual or group of people with the result of discouraging them from participating in Reddit and its communities is against the rule against harassment in Reddit's Content Policy

The right of free speech is always allowed, but all speech must come with responsibilities;

By constantly allowing violations of the Content Policy, the entire subreddit becomes vulnerable, and Reddit may reserve the right to shutdown the community at any time;

Not removing re-incident harassers sends a message that harassment is allowed in the sub (even though prohibited by Reddit), provided you get a temporary ban;

The arguments for the policy as it is today, i.e. no permabans issued

The arguments for the current policy and against the proposal for change, as articulated by u/aminok:

To be clear, I strongly advise that we maintain the "max 30 day ban" rule. There is no scenario where this approach doesn't suffice for ordinary bad behavior IMHO. We can put problematic users on "probation", where if they reoffend during their (say 1 year) probation period, they are immediately banned again for 30 days, instead of given a warning (which is what we normally do).

So far it has worked for us. So far we have not been overrun with toxicity despite having a max 30 day ban policy for years.

A permanent ban totally eliminates the possibility of reform. Some people have problems with the mods and other users, but eventually come around and become constructive members of the community. A permanent ban totally eliminates that possibility. It's how other major subreddits work, and I don't want it to be how EthTrader works. By having some measure of respect for free speech, EthTrader has had more vigorous dialogue and avoided becoming a bubble/echo-chamber.

I elaborated on my reasoning for this "30 day max ban" policy on Discord:

First, the rule provides a check on moderator abuse. If we, as mods, become biased or tyrannical, the rule ensures we are subject to some push back from those we are repressing. A rule like this cannot be subject to mod judgment that a particular user should be exempted from the limit, or else it ceases to act as a check on mod abuse.

Second, the rule keeps the door open for the user to rehabilitate and rejoin the community. These 30 day bans are very easy to give out. Even if they try to grief the community as soon as their ban is lifted, the damage will be minimal. With the user on probation, as soon as they reoffend, we can remove their offending comment and give them another 30 day ban. So to sum up: the rule leaves the door open for rehabilitation while imposing very little cost on the community.

In response to the "arguments against the current policy", I have the following to add:

number 5 states:

By constantly allowing violations of the Content Policy, the entire subreddit becomes vulnerable, and Reddit may reserve the right to shutdown the community at any time;

I find this totally implausible. The moderators responding to a rule violation with a 30 day ban is not "allowing" that rule violation. In any case where a user is so problematic that Reddit finds their presence on the site unacceptable, Reddit would suspend their account. We have no obligation to permanently ban someone that Reddit itself is not banning. Arguing that the current policy could lead to the community being shutdown amounts to fearmongering. On the light of the disagreement between mods, we're leaving for the community to decide the matter, and I am proposing the following:

Give users two opportunities to adjust their misconduct before issuing a perma ban:

Opportunity/Strike 1: A warning that the user has broken the rules regarding harassment and keeping decorum;

Opportunity/Strike 2: A temporary ban of either 7 or 30 days, depending on how bad the episode was, followed by yet another warning;

Opportunity/Strike 3: A permanent ban in case of re-incidence.

This applies for the current case and future ones on harassment and insulting. If the policy is kept, such user will be unbanned. Options

[YES] Implement the proposal, giving users two opportunities before issuing a permanent ban

[NO] Keep the policy as it is, with no permanent bans for harassment and insults