It's great that you apparently took the time to read the advice on asking good questions and learned from it. Thus your latest question now has a score of 6, which should contribute to diminishing if not completely stopping further rate-limiting.
First of all I want to know, what is the basis on which the number of days of being restricted is chosen?
The details are only known to those with access to the code, so what I can offer is mostly educated guesswork, but, quoting from the announcement of the rolling rate-limts:
New users who aren't doing so well initially will be shown the additional guidance and will be asked to wait anywhere from one to seven days before asking their next question, depending on how they've done recently.
the basis is the reception of your recent posts. I think that "recent" here isn't exclusively time-based, but includes your last $n$ posts (where $n$ is a small positive integer), so just waiting one year after one's last badly received post wouldn't nullify the effect, only mitigate it. But one of the explicitly mentioned factors in the algorithm is "How long you tend to wait between asking questions", so a pause in posting does have an effect.
The most influential part is however the reception of your recent posts. So if your next question is again well-received, that should reduce the length of the next system-imposed pause, or completely get you out of the rate-limit (for the time being, later badly received posts could push you back). If your next question is however badly received (downvoted and/or closed), that would cause a longer pause again.
And secondly, suppose there are 2 guys, each of which asked 3 bad questions, and got restricted for seven days. After 7 days, each of them asked a fourth question, and one got 1 up-vote and another say 8 up-votes. Will the restriction on the number of days on which each will not be able to ask the next question be same?
I don't know (the details of the algorithm aren't public), but under the assumption that the reception of their previous posts was similar, and not too extreme, I'm confident that the one with the +8 post will face a shorter pause - possibly none at all. The main criterion is "how they've done recently", and a question with a score of 8 should count as better than a question with a score of 1. The difference between +8 and +1 is large enough that it ought to make a difference in the outcome under usual circumstances.