Between that interaction (which wasn’t solely me, there were other people that were treated similarly), and other things I have witnessed from people in that movement, I’m confident that it’s not healthy and not something I want any part of.

They have noble goals, but the approach is wrong in a lot of cases. Many of the people have the same toxic personalities that they rail against so loudly.

There is no problem with an individuals choosing not to engage based on their own experience. The problem with cancel culture is that we are encouraged to treat people as "cancelled" based on hearsay.

You're under no obligation to do anything. Individuals are simply exercising their own right not to engage based on their own experience.

From other comments, you seem to be drawing a distinction between "social pressure" and "individual choices". Can you explain when one becomes the other?

I don't think there's a clear bright line, any more than there's a clear bright line between being avoiding individuals you dislike and discrimination. That doesn't mean the distinction doesn't exist.

If one shopkeeper won't serve you, they're exercising their own rights and you can take your business elsewhere. But if every shopkeeper won't serve you, you're probably being discriminated against. I don't presume to draw the line precisely, but we recognise the difference.

I think we all know a mob when we see one.

If the mob is acting to achieve an ends I perceive as immoral, I am very quick to see a mob.

If the mob is acting to achieve an ends I perceive as righteous, I might never see the mob for what they really are.

I've found many people do even less well than I do, at this.

Clearly not, you'll need to be a bit more convincing than "I know it when I see it."

When confronted with a mob you won't have any questions or about whether is or is not.

That’s not what I’m arguing, and I believe ESR wasn’t being intolerant of her, but rather some of her views.

Yes, so intolerance of someone like ESR seems valid under that view.