[bartbutler]

> You're expecting us to believe nobody on your team would take a payout from or be coerced by US LEO's or spooks. That's crazy.

No, we're saying that we don't store the data partly so that such a scenario isn't available because historical data simply doesn't exist.

> It's better to not put you in that position of us having to trust you like that.

Look, we freely admit that you can't verify that we do this. If we are part of your threat model, you probably shouldn't rely on us doing it. If we aren't, then it's an additional layer of security relative to other providers who explicitly don't. If you receive unencrypted email, which is virtually everyone, those are your two options. Regardless of whether you believe us, we're still going to do it, because it's better for us and its better for users. There is no 'third way' that allows us or anyone else to receive unencrypted mail on your behalf and verifiably not save a copy. The only solution is to not have unencrypted mail, which is part of the reason we spent a year developing easy-to-use PGP interoperability.