Is that your opinion or do you have any evidence to backup that claim? Your conclusion is based on a false premise that “everything would mostly work”.
Setting any other folder type (other than “Receive Encrypted”) prevents any other use for that folder anyhow (eg you can’t set it on an untrusted device as ‘Send’, ‘Receive’ or ‘Send & receive’ since you can only use that folder as “Receive Encypted” once a password is set on the other device. - the originating device gives a failure otherwise.
Unless encrypted data is stored in a special folder and “Receive Encrypted” removed as a status option altogether (ie making encrypted transparent and independent of folder status), making it so that any device can untrust any other device and still have the encrypted data stored on the untrusted device regardless of folder status on the untrusted device…but thats not how it appears to have been designed?
At the moment, the only way to use the untrusted device folder is to select “Receive Encrypted” Once selected, it becomes a dedicated encrpted folder - no local changes allowed - as per this:
Every other Folder Type option for the folder on an untrusted device is pointless - eg it is either an encrypted folder or not. This is as per current design.
However, if a folder is to be used as suggested (ie still usable locally), then remove the “Receive Encrypted” status altogether, and have encrypted data in a special folder (it’s un-usable by the untrusted device anyhow) to allow normal use of the same folder locally (as with any other folder) using the normal 3xfolder statuses. The current design for folder management would need to change for this to work properly. Otherwise you have a pandora’s box.