I see your point, there are not many people going "oh hey! look at all my output, btw I use a zettlekasten" and I think its for a few reasons:

People haven't been on this bandwagon for long enough to make that direct statement.
There is so much structure behind the definition of a "zettlekasten" or antinet that it might seem like someone who is following core principles feels that they aren't allowed to say they are using this method. Scott I think said that he just wrote on cards before but never used the system like antinet the way he does now.
People into knowledge management are always evolving their way of thinking (at least I am) because they want to find something that works for their specific output. Right now, my output is academic work, but I graduate in October and my antinet will shift in output needs and im not sure what that will mean for my knowledge workflow. But I think thats an important distinction.

I do think output is important, but I also think that the zettle world is really new. But I think a lot of us picked it up becasue it was like a feature to something we were already doing. For me, I mean Ive been taking written notes since 5th grade, but I didnt come up with something as sophisticated as what Luhmen did.

Your method is also growing, and you have some great evidence of that, and that should be enough for your own personal growth. I picked up antinet because it felt good, and I see the benefits.

​

Also, comparing productivity tools feels very much like a "see who's better" game. I think the better thing is to find people who you aspire to and see what they do and try it!

Ramble over