How is the 'cancellation' any less democratic?

It seems more democratic than a majority deciding for everyone, if each person decides for themselves whether to avoid or not.

A mob has a reverse synergy: the more it grows, the lower their common sense, until they can't regulate themselves. At least democracy tries to put some balances to prevent runaway demagogy.

Cancellation suffers from social pressure. If the mob cancelled someone then you have to, too, otherwise you're canceled next.

At least with a ballot, your vote is a secret.

That's completely wrong. How is it democratic or anti when people online choose to not associate with you? Is it when they do it on a social media platform? When they make a hashtag or group? Again, that's more spontaneous action that no one has any legal nor moral authority to stop. Next, you'll tell me it's okay for evangelicals to boycott of some company that visibly supports LGBT rights then tell me it's bad when some random kids just mocking and jeering someone else online.

>Ostracism was democratic process

Please go on? If people want to "cancel", even if I think they are doing it for a bad reason or mislead then that's their right. Why is it such a big issue?