The expression "because a user doesn't want to write code in a certain style" is exclusive. Some users surely do not want, but some others do not know, and some others can not (when the language does not allow to use an extension). I won't make a course about inclusivity, because I'm certainly not an expert, but I can spot exclusive language pretty quickly.
I suggest an inclusive approach to the problem. I have given an example related to documentation in a previous post in this thread. Documentation writers make assumptions about their readers, but usually much less assumptions than people who want to enforce a coding style. Count me in the group of documentation writers, and this is reflected in the "generosity" of the pitch.
Before I can foster the exclusive approach, I want to read what's wrong with the inclusive one.
But the addition of new keywords and syntax has a non-zero cost for Swift users and the ecosystem as a whole, so I don't think it's the case that doing so (in order to accommodate all programming styles) is an obvious win.
That's why I, and other people, have tried to give the expected benefits of the conformance
keyword.
EDIT: I'm sure we can make progress without the exclusive/inclusive dichotomy. It can help clarifying some ideas, but it is touchy, and can make people nervous, or feel attacked. This is clearly not my intent.