In general, I agree. However, I would hardly call 1 potential soft fork every few years "flooding." Most folks seem to agree that Bitcoin needs some form of covenants at some point, though. Moreover, nothing requires us to settle on which of the proposed options we want to try and activate any time soon, but we absolutely SHOULD talk about all of the options well in advance - their pros and cons, those with the expertise to review the code, etc.

That being the case, I would hardly call the covenants discussion "flooding" Bitcoin with soft forks. We've had Taproot all the way back in 2021 and now we are in the process of discussing maybe adding covenants sometime in the future.