It completely invalidates your argument. Your argument is that an error-handling system as described would be undesirable because it would result in developers

It completely invalidates your argument. Your argument is that an error-handling system as described would be undesirable because it would result in developers misusing unchecked exceptions. Go already has unchecked exceptions in the form of `panic`. So either developers are already abusing it, in which case go's current error-handling approach is no better than the one proposed according to your metric. Or developers have access to it but aren't abusing it, in which case there's no reason to expect they'd abuse it in a system where doing it the right way is even easier than it is today. In my experience, users already do experience stack traces as it's embarrassingly easy to accidentally operate on a nil pointer.