There’s basically three problems:
1: Tyrannical powermods can make shitty communities.
2: Trolls and bad actors and generally-sociopathic cunts can be toxic and disruptive by sealioning, rules-lawyering and ‘just asking questions’ (aka JAQing off)
3: There’s no fixed set of rules that reliably walks a middle path between the two.
If you have no control over how mods mod, you can end up with nasty little tetanus-wound shitholes - imagine ferinstance if corpo shills took over all the news and politics subs, and banned anyone critical of Elon Musk or Israel.
If you don’t let mods mod, then for instance every support / activism community would be under constant siege from concern trolls and smug bigots with a new little talking point they want to ‘debate’ every single damn day, and we don’t need any more trans kids driven to suicide please and thankyou.
The admins decided that the former was worse than the latter, and said no, you can’t just kick out troublemakers so long as they use pretty language instead of hurling abuse; you have to humour them and allow some of their shit.
see also: the Nazi bar problem
This was a terrible and shitty approach to take, and I am (provisionally) glad it’s been suspended pending further review.
Though in this age of enshittification, I have little confidence that the next iteration won’t actually be worse.
I stand by my assertion that personal discretion is the only approach that can’t be gamed.
Trust the mods with the banhammer, and if they do a bad job, replace them outright.
This still leaves you vulnerable to shitty admins, but you would be in any case.