First thing's first, Wookieecookie has stated that with their experiment, they stress that the possibility of policy being changed or further experiments being run is slim, even with favorable results. Even still, I don't imagine they'd take on ideas from the list of "stuff that's proven horribly ineffective in the past" to see about reimplementing them.
Second; they've already tried what amounted to permanent chat restrictions in the past. They had indefinitely scaling chat restrictions at one point, and they found that players under longer-duration CR's would just turn to trolling, griefing, and intentionally feeding to take out their frustrations on their teammates - removing their ability to chat didn't remove their ability to be toxic, it only narrowed down the avenues they could take to do it.
Personally I think peoples issue with banned accounts is partially the money, partially all their hard earned rewards. However, mainly it’s the friends list they lose. A lot of people lose some really good friends and I don’t think that’s fair at all.
I mean, they're given ample opportunities to reform (standard punishment path is 10-game CR, 25-game CR, 14-day ban, then a permaban), and each time they're warned the punishments are only going to get more severe - with the 14-day ban message straight up telling them that the next punishment will be a permanent one.
If they really cared about that friends list or the money they put into that account, they'd take the hint and shape up at the first chat restriction, and not have to be warned that the next punishment will be a permaban - let alone actually getting permabanned.
It's not fair to Riot or other players when someone decides to ignore the rules and the punishments and warnings for breaking them. So, my question is, why should Riot be fair to them? It isn't a one-way street, there's gotta be some concession on the side of the player if Riot's going to be fair.
