I read the article but I'm not sure what the objective was in the end. It seem a way to lengthy education course on E2EE. Almost like you're trying to convince someone of something you think they don't need. That usually ends badly in my experience.
Actually the opposite! We have many users that ask about end-to-end encryption and what that means and if we have it, so this blog post was written to try to answer those questions all at once, in what I hope is a way that non-users of Supernotes also find educational.
But if any of our users feel like they need E2EE for their notes, we'd like to steer them towards a platform better suited because that's not our priority. We've typically done the same thing when small businesses come our way and ask if Supernotes would be a good fit for their team: we tell them the team use-case is not our priority at the moment, so if that is a priority for them they would probably be better served by a shared workspace tool like Notion.
Still sounds like you are trying to convince people that its not needed. I have found that people who spend more energy on explaining why they think something is the way it is ends up being more about them wanting to convince others of an opinion, than stating outright, short and sweet, why you aren't going to implement something. Personally I don't think its necessary to have a big education course one what E2EE is, there is plenty o material on the subject that can be pointed to.
People DEFINITELY don't know what e2ee means, and it's wildly abused as a buzzword. Explaining what it is and what complementary requirements are necessary is just universally positive, no matter where in the privacy debate you sit.
