[nitrogen]

It's barbaric overkill. It affects other parties far more than the target. It's emblematic of a vicious vindictiveness that is unbecoming of members of a cohesive society. It's simply disgusting to dig into unrelated matters over a relatively petty dispute. It shows no sense of proportionality, charity, or kindness. It is ultimately counterproductive to the creation of the kind of world we all ought to be creating for our mutual benefit.

[nitrogen]

It's clear from downvotes and lack of replies that some parts of this community have a long way to go before deserving the moral high ground the community tries to claim.

There is no justice in mob justice.

[trhway]

>There is no justice in mob justice.

you can't have it both ways. The other side refused to accept the form of the justice of the civilized society, ie. the court of law justice. Do you have any other form of justice in mind, other than the two already mentioned - the court of law and the mob ones? Please do tell if you do.

[nitrogen]

The courts have mechanisms for dealing with land access disputes and uncooperative people, which have not been exhausted. And it's just a beach. While coastal access is an important right, it's not worth throwing away all the other aspects of civilized society to try to make a point.

[lovich]

I still don't see how it would be any different than a boycott. If it's big enough to be successful even when the companies he funds are providing value, then that means everyone involved is saying that stopping what he's done is worth enough to give up on the value from those companies. Are people supposed to just lay back and let the wealthy do what they want without a fight anymore? It's not like violence is being advocated, just voting with your dollar