I can see that argument, but - it's kinda a philosophical question about "who the sender is". Is the the person who typed out the text? or is it the server which transcribed that text into N new emails?
The ML server will verify the original authors SPF. The N recipients will verify the ML servers SPF - the chain (which matches the series of MTA's involved) is still verified end to end.
> It'll break when used together with DMARC's alignment checks.
Yea, DMARC is a much bigger issue for mailing lists, but that's no reason to say "A mailing list will _always_ break SPF" - a well configured* ML has no issues with SPF at all.
* And, yes - the definition of "well configured" had to change when SPF was introduced, that's of course annoying, but there has been many many years for ML operators to make these changes.
The recipients have no way to check that the mailing list server has checked SPF/DKIM/DMARC. Mailing lists very rarely drop messages because of a failing SPF/DKIM/DMARC check.
ARC tries to fix this, but requires recipients to trust the mailing list server. Just using plain DKIM is much better, recipients can just treat ML-forwarded emails just like direct emails.