I appreciate your reply and thank you for the suggestions.
I fundamentally disagree with the idea that "it's not Evernote's fault" that they implement weak versions of features and/or remove valuable ones.
It is impossible to claim that Evernote is not designed to share information collated in their product. Evernote has designed share functionality and implemented it in their production releases. It's there. You can see it. It's a big green button on notes. It's a top-level menu context menu on notebooks. This presence is incontrovertible evidence that they have intended to feature share functionality in their product. The problem is not that users are "doing something Evernote wasn't designed to do" because sharing functionality is literally there! The problem is that the share functionality is does not follow the logic of the object heirarchy. It is implemented for some objects and containers but, mysteriously, not for others.
The forum is shot-through with requests for better versions, complete versions of this functionality. If you're going to build share, build it completely and correctly and in a way that has basic parity with other tools. That's what users have been saying, presumably since 2014 or even earlier.
It's a common refrain in these forums to provide excuses for Evernote (e.g. "Evernote was never designed to xyz!"), but the market and user desire is clear, reasonable, and repeatedly expressed. This is the Internet Age -- actually the post-internet age -- and canonical features like sharing (or Tables of Contents, or sortable tabular data) are hardly places where products in this category can fall short. This is a product development issue.