Item 23 of Effective C++ (3rd edition) by Scott Meyers is titled: "Prefer non-member non-friend functions to member functions". The reason Scott suggests is the increase of encapsulation. So, only the functions that need to access the private members are made member functions, the other functions are made free-standing.
Now, the user does not care about my considerations. All he wants is a clean uniform interface that is as simple to learn as possible. Having some functions as members and some as free-standing seems to break this uniformity. Furthermore, the choice of which function is member and which is free-standing may seem random to the user, who is unaware of the implementation details (i.e. the private members) of my class.
One answer even cites a language proposal related to this issue.
My question is: is it a good idea to always provide a free-standing wrapper function for each member function in order to present the user with a uniform interface consisting of free-standing functions only?