cEDH Should Not Have its Own Banlist

When you sit down to play cEDH, what do you expect? Hallmark cards, the likes of Ad Nauseam
It's that last point that draws me to today's topic, format regulation. Competitive Commander has had a pretty messy history when it comes to structured regulation, with the last cEDH-targeted intervention being the removal of Flash
cEDH is Commander
At its core, the thing that defines a format is its banlist. Say what you will about the management of that banlist and the cards that are or are not on it, but this list forms the central architecture of a format. In Commander, this central architecture is complicated by the existence of Rule Zero; that is, the format's tailoring towards a casual audience. In order to illustrate this tension, let's first take a comparative look at Modern.
Modern is not a casual format. Tournament circuits aren't the result of an emergent phenomena, but rather a calling card for players to join in. However, this doesn't mean that casual Modern doesn't exist. People play kitchen table Modern all the time, eagerly bringing fringe lists and homebrews into the fray in the hopes that maybe they can stand up to Energy or PrimeTime or any of the format's myriad allstars. Crucially, these less-competitive lists are no less Modern than any of the format's allstars. Sure, they never make a tournament top-eight, but they are free to exist within the marketplace of Modern ideas.
This logic works in the opposite direction for Commander. Tournaments are not the format's calling card, but rather a phenomena emergent from the subculture that is cEDH. The rules are the same, but the expectations are different. The majority of Commander players show up with aspirations of doing something personal in the course of their game, as opposed to chasing tournament glory. This naturally gives rise to a decentralized system of home rules (Rule Zero) that moderate the format and fill in the blanks which the Rules Committee has purposefully left.
The implementation of home moderation, however, is far from universal: for some, it's as simple as playing at the power level of the pod. For others, it's explicit banlist augmentations. When it comes to this latter class of moderation, however, I'd argue that the augmentation rises to the level of format-creation, as no longer can anyone hop in a pod blindfolded and expect to be playing a legal deck. In the competitive-focused Modern format, strict observance is placed on the banlist in order to assure universality of play. In the casual-focused Commander format, this observance is much more hazy, which creates a significant barrier to play.
Competitive Commander sought to remove this barrier, with the trade-off being the sacrifice of personal exploration. Yes, fringe decks abound. Yes, homebrews can be viable. Strictly speaking, however, this is not the optimal way to equip yourself for a game of cEDH. In this way, cEDH is the strictest observance of Commander as a format: the spirit of a game is completely changed, but the rules are fervently upheld. Under this logic, the creation of a separate cEDH banlist doesn't moderate competitive Commander: it separates it into its own format.
The High-Power Pipeline
Assuming that a banlist is implemented, I see two primary issues with this separation beyond simply the pedantry of the format vs. subformat argument. The first is player onboarding.
Like many other players, my transition from casual to competitive Commander was a gradual one. I did not see RogSi players hashing out counterwars or BlueFarm players landing Mystic Remora
Separating cEDH from casual Commander via the implementation of its own banlist has the very serious risk of preventing player onboarding. While cEDH has a well-defined meta, that meta isn't so gatekept as to prevent outside players from hopping into a pod with a high-power casual list and having a good time. Creating a separate banlist, especially for a competitive format, means strict observance of a different set of rules, one which may inadvertently keep many high-power casual players stuck in kitchentable pods.
In the course of hashing out this argument prior, I've heard one common refrain: the majority of changes would be unbans, with only incredibly problematic cards being banned. To this I have to respond that any change, no matter size nor the direction (ban vs. unban), is going to have substantial ripple effects. To illustrate this, I want to talk about two cards: Fastbond
Rhystic Study
Now, I want to mention that my opinion on Rhystic Study
Moving to the unban perspective, it's here that we're again faced by another jarring experience except in the complete opposite direction. Now, cards you haven't played against aren't just legal: they're optimal. Fastbond
Cross Comparability
My second banlist implementation issue is primarily logistics-based, and that is the issue of tournament comparability.
Let me preface this by saying that I acknowledge all developments take time. I'm a gradualist at heart, so I can appreciate that an endeavor as complicated as regulating a format is going to be drawn out. cEDH didn't come to be overnight, it has been growing for years. Unfortunately, the gradualism of banlist adoption has real-time consequences, especially if it only partially succeeds.
In the course of creating a cEDH banlist, there will undoubtedly be a plethora of significant tournaments across the world which do not observe it. The current members of the newly minted cEDH Rules Committee include people with important roles in tournament organization, so the rollout of such a banlist shouldn't be incredibly disjointed, but it will nonetheless be limited and selective. So, in the meantime, I need to ask: will the tournaments not adopting it, those tournaments which follow the Commander banlist with strict obedience, be any less valid? Similarly, what of those tournaments which do follow the new banlist? It doesn't make much sense to compare the finals pod of a tournament with Rhystic Study
This brings me to my point on partial success.
I do not believe that cEDH is at a point right now where, if a significant portion of the playerbase decided to play with an alternate banlist, both populations would continue to grow at a healthy pace. Rather, I believe it would set both sides back. While this is in large part due to my earlier concerns about new-player onboarding, this is also simply because it would further segment the playerbase and force uncomfortable decisions.
I like playing Rhystic Study
For each player, given that the cEDH pool as a whole is competitively oriented, they are now faced with this question. Are the proposed changes in my favour, or against? If against, obey the official banlist. If in favour, then follow the cEDH banlist.
This question falls away if the banlist either completely succeeds or completely fails, but not if it lands somewhere in between, a place which I believe it is destined to lie for a significant portion of its early days.
Wrap Up
cEDH needs attention. We need discussion and experimentation. However, just like with any experiment, we also need to be incredibly cautious and attentive to risk. When I think of cEDH, I think of high power constrained by a metagame. By implementing a separate banlist, that vision dissipates, players become disjointed, and we're back to Rule Zero. Is this risk worth it? In my eyes, the format is safe enough and enjoyable enough that the answer is no.