You don’t have a point. You have a recipe for disaster, a game plan for losing.
There’s no way you would read through that link so fast.
The electorate is not as important in the Article V process as are the elected state legislators; they call the shots.
Right now the leaders of the Article V movement are drafting procedures and amendments for legislators to review and support so that they don’t all show up for a meeting and engage in chaos. The Article V meeting aka Convention of States will be orderly and focused. They are not going to engage in a plethora of amendments period. They are going to officially record their votes to propose the pre-approved amendments and then it goes off to ratification.
One of the criterion for amendments is to select ones that cover the most ground.
Your idea of groups and groups of amendments is a non-starter - NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
I've been reading since I was 3 years old, and I speed-read with a very high comprehension rate (my IQ is over 145). So please don't try to tell me I could not read that fast, nor try to imply that I'm not too smart merely because I disagree with your approach. I'm not calling your approach stupid, so kindly do the same courtesy for me, even if you disagree.
With regards to your "specific" amendment, it appears to me that it is quite vague and lacking in detail, and would lend itself to the kind of convenient "interpretation" by SCOTUS that dware seems to be so concerned about.