I would say the vast, vast majority of people don't know that CG range and location is directly related to tail size. When they are newbies, someone says "CG at X location of the chord is good" where x tends to be quoted between 25% and 35% chord.
The discussion ends there. It works for a few planes. No more thought is applied. Talk over the pinic tables at the field rarely strays from a similar theme.
______________________________

FWIW - I got a nice giant scale Privateer old-timer flying boat for a good deal because it wouldn't fly off water - so the seller said.
Anyway, he had it balanced at 25% chord - per the PLANS - and had used about 2 pounds in the nose to do so. After adding the weight, he also had to shim the stabilizer up out of its saddle to get a balancing downforce.

This on a plane resebling an old free-flight glider in dimensions and construction that should have weighed 10 lbs to begin with. The tailplane is almost as big as a wing panel. I believe it's 40% of the total wing area. This is a true lifting tail airplane. The neutral point is at 80% chord. The incidences, natural balance, water step location and of course tail area all indicate this. So, this guy was trying to fly it with 55% static stability and at least 2 lbs overweight. Talk about a cost of ignorance. Why the plans put the CG at that point I have no idea, since the actual designer abviously understood it would be well back from there.