I feel a ban will only serve a minority audience, not the majority of HN who can choose with upvotes.
A permanent ban is pretty extreme because NYT does have some interesting articles and stories in recent months.
That way you can keep your preference to yourself too.
Pay-walled and lower-than-average quality articles promote people judging the article by the title, going to the comments to actually understand the article's content or post without enough information.
Banning NYTimes would increase average comment quality by forcing the link-poster to find an article readable by everyone, possibly higher quality and less click-baity.
What I don't like about nytimes is the paywall. It is just stupid to allow bots to read all content but try to make people pay by allowing them to read a few articles but requiring (payed) login afterwards. This requires tracking people and this can be conterfighted by adblockers, cookie cleaners, etc. Either put all your content behind paywalls or make everything free.