First, just to explain why each of those words isn’t actually redundant:
“considerate” is because there are always a lot more things to think about than just if all the people talking agree
“broader” is because many of the people who might be affected by ENS don’t even know it exists yet, much less have an active voice in the decisions being made. It’s not just “token holders” or even “current name holders” whose consensus matters.
“grow” is because it is appropriate for successive rounds of adjustment to eventually change what ENS is supposed to be (think like the “universal login” aspect and how that component of what ENS is has developed over time. We can’t know up front what all such possibilities might be).
Now, that being said of course the wording might be able to be improved here, and the whole point of Article 0 is that you can never include everything relevant. But just removing those three words to leave “Only the active and collaborative actions of the ENS community can maintain and improve the ENS system throughout the coming years” seems to lose a little. How do people feel about the following as a way to address the points from both @fig and @lefterisjp :
“It is not the intent of this constitution to confuse the mechanisms by which the ENS community expresses its consensus for a limiting definition on what that consensus can look like or how it can be expressed. Only the careful and active collaboration of the entire ENS community can maintain and grow ENS into its fullest potential.”
This week has been crazy busy IRL for me but yes I will try and write that up next (hopefully with the above tweak if people think it’s an improvement).