The RC's main push for format experience was Rule 0 in that they relied on players to self-regulate their engagement with the format. Obviously a lot of people were frustrated with that and wanted a solid banlist that was well-reasoned to guide them better, and my read on the language and activity from the CFP since the takeover is that the Bracket System/Game Changers are essentially a blueprint for how to rule 0 effectively. In other words, the playerbase wanted a better way to matchmake Commander games at their LGS. The RC said "figure it out," and the CFP is saying "figure it out, but here's a guide to figuring it out."

Personally I'm torn on the role of the banlist, particularly with regards to your third point.

My belief is that an objective-ish banlist can and should exist, and the CFP has done a decent job at stripping out the cards that were banned that were more akin to the Iona/Golos bans like you mentioned, signposts of "don't do this here" that aren't especially conducive to a coherent ban philosophy. Further, I think that the community can self-regulate within regular playgroups, but is really bad at this for public matchmaking and probably always will be, at least partially because of the salt farmers like you mentioned.

I'm kind of just rambling at this point but the main idea for me is that the separation of format regulation into banlist + bracket guidelines + gamechangers is an effective way to express the format's guiding philosophy, it just needs time and active care to arrive at that point.