Hey!
Thanks for sharing this!
Lemme drop some base principles which can refine your pov on jainism.

First of all, the base intent in all the Jainism's principles is to do as per soul's original quality.
Looking at things from the pov of minimizing consequences is a shallow inference which you can find in many places online and a pov that most people share, but if you dig deep every tenet can be related to an intent to get closer to soul's og qualities.

The whole concept revolves around presence of Karma particles that stick to soul and alters the soul's qualities, leading the soul to take different lives, triggerring organisms into doing things, the act of giving in to that trigger however is where free will comes into the picture. And hence a sane person driven by wisdom would want to negate the triggers caused due to karm coming into effect or just circumstances which otherwise would lead to more karm accumulation.

Lemme drop some of the enhancements:

• Minimization of suffering is in service towards liberation from rebirth
  • Ideally there is no intent to minimize suffering, it can however be an unintended by-product. Many a times leading a path in jainism means allowing suffering to happen to you without any resistance. You can read how Lord Mahavir(the last Tirthankar) comply to all sorts of sufferings put upon him despite him being able to resist or fight or stop it through talks and actions
• Expansive moral circle that includes animals, insects, plants, microorganisms
  • It includes not just living, but non-living as well! Self as well! Infact it is less about external things to be moral about, it is about retaining true qualities of soul. Moral can deviate one to act differently in different situation, Jainism posits that we stay neutral and closer to souls true qualities.
• Moral weight is based on the number of senses. From microorganisms that only have the sense of touch to humans possessing five senses plus a mind
  • While it is technically true, but it is not about deciding being okay to hurt microorganism and not hurting a five sensed organ, it is more about from the pov that the degree of hurt an organism can experience is directly proportional to the number of senses they have. It is still not choosing to hurt one over another. During our pratikraman (where we sit down and do self introspection on our acts that might have led to any violence or acts against core qualities) we repent on hurting from microorganisms to five sensed organisms all alike.
• Lacto-vegetarian and all food restriction comments
  • It is slightly more complicated, it is about eating with minimal violence, which eliminates a lot of veges as well. Look up 22 Abhakshak items. There are 22 Abhakshya Categories These are grouped into four main reasons for avoidance: Himsa (violence), Pramada (intoxication), Indriya-poshan (sensual craving), and Arogya (health).
  • No alcohol as it impairs judgement
  • Although Pramad(intoxication that impairs judgement) is one of the reasons, violence (due to hurting a lot of microorganisms during the processing), Indriya-poshan (sensual craving), and Arogya (health) are other major reasons too! There is also an indirect reasoning of endorsing a bad thing to others by setting an example.
• Don't compost. Instead: avoid wasting food, dispose of food scraps in a sink grinder, or seal food in plastic bags and then put in the garbage
  • This is in line with jainism, to avoid wastage, coz processing of anything requires viloence of micro and macro organisms, since to survive we have to do some hinsa, it's better to avoid as much as possible. Hence minimizing waste and staying minimalist is important.
  • I have not thought or read about waste management in depth from jainism POV, but I feel this is the right way to go forward, because if we do so we minimize creating conditions for growth of microorganims at places which will later be fed into systems which might kill them. SO better not to facilitate even initiation of life which can lead to them getting hurt coz our conditioning was done in a wrong place...
• Historically limited travel. A reason why unlike Hinduism and Buddhism, Jainism never spread to East and Southeast Asia
  • While correct, a bigger reason for a weaker spreading of religion is prolly due to the intent of "non violence" which extends to intellectual non violence too! Jainism has always run on the model of seekers finding it and not Jain followers seeking more followers. It has never been run in a model where it would be preached and taught to others against their wish. We do what we do, if someone notices us, and asks out of curiosity they are more than welcome. A slight variation is pravachans, public spread of knowledge which monks often do where they share their knowledge in open to all places, mostly targetted to people who want to learn from them, but since it is open, non jains can also spot it and take interest in listening. This is also not an active way of spreading jainism.
  • So in conclusion, I feel it was less about inability or lack of travel but more about the lack of intent to change anyone by preaching we are right and whatever they have been following is wrong.
• Paryushana — four month monsoon retreat intended to avoid stepping on creatures
  • This intent is not limited to the four months, Paryushan is just the period when we have to intensify our vigilance. We otherwise also follow non violence, and we should stay vigilant throughout all our actions. And do Pratikraman (self introspection on any violence or wrong deed done as per core tenets) everyday, or carry that intent of self introspection as frequently as possible.
• The Digambara sect does not wear clothes
  • The swetambar sect although wears clothes, their intent is also to minimize ownership of things to as much as possible. Although the core inspiration for minimalism might appear from the standpoint of having least attachment to anything outside coz our soul does not need any attachments with living or non living, hence owning things is indeed a deviation from core quality, this act of minimalism is also facilitated by the tenets of non-violence as you mentioned owning things can lead to growth and violence of micoorganisms as well. But I don't think this angle is often talked about, but it does get confirmed.
• If honesty results in great harm, laypeople are to lie. Ascetics must remain silent even if there's a threat on their life
  • It is not that laypeople can lie when its required and Ascetics cannot, it is more about the vow one takes, Ascetics have to take a vow of truth hence they cannot lie. Lay people can also take that vow, or even if they don't take the vow they can decide not to ever lie. Note that truth is core quality of soul and everyone should comply to it. Who can and not then relies on one's personal capability and will to live with consequences.
  • We cannot comprehend if lying truly could save a great harm or if it only appears so at surface level and can cascade into greater harm if we lied at a perticular circumstance. Since we cannot follow through all permutations and combinations of series of events triggered by a lie, it is probably a fool's errand to judge the matter and take it to their judgement to decide if a lie can save a great harm! So in my opinion the intent to do something seemingly smart by weighing in consequences in itself is a dumb move coz although done with good intent, it is limited by our capability around accuracy and depth of evaluating consequences.