I am not arguing for a middle ground, I argue for addressing the issues directly instead of being maximalist in any way.

You are dismissing things as "maximalist", which is not conducive to treating certain things as sacrosanct.

For example: end-to-end encryption is sacrosanct, and must not be broken, ever. If you want access, your only option should be to serve one of the ends a warrant. That's not "maximalist", that's holding to a principle.