doc: revise breaking changes material in COLLABORATOR_GUIDE

* Remove unnecessary paragraph explaining why Current and LTS have
  stability guarantees that master branch does not. (Leave material
  explaining what those stability guarantees are.)
* Upgrade advisory and passive "Collaborators should take significant
  care" to more direct "Take significant care".

PR-URL: #25730
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <Bethany.Griggs@uk.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anto Aravinth <anto.aravinth.cse@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com>

COLLABORATOR_GUIDE.md

@@ -270,24 +270,14 @@ For more information, see [Deprecations](#deprecations).
 #### Breaking Changes to Internal Elements
 
 Breaking changes to internal elements may occur in semver-patch or semver-minor
-commits. Collaborators should take significant care when making and reviewing
-such changes. An effort must be made to determine the potential impact of the
-change in the ecosystem. Use
+commits. Take significant care when making and reviewing such changes. Make
+an effort to determine the potential impact of the change in the ecosystem. Use
 [Canary in the Goldmine](https://github.com/nodejs/citgm) to test such changes.
 If a change will cause ecosystem breakage, then it is semver-major. Consider
 providing a Public API in such cases.
 
 #### When Breaking Changes Actually Break Things
 
-Because breaking (semver-major) changes are permitted to land on the master
-branch at any time, at least some subset of the user ecosystem may be adversely
-affected in the short term when attempting to build and use Node.js directly
-from the master branch. This potential instability is why Node.js offers
-distinct Current and LTS release streams that offer explicit stability
-guarantees.
-
-Specifically:
-
 * Breaking changes should *never* land in Current or LTS except when:
   * Resolving critical security issues.
   * Fixing a critical bug (e.g. fixing a memory leak) requires a breaking