The unsatisfying response to this is that circumstances matter, and long lists of names without context do not give the sort of information that would allow one to act.

I don't think this project's lists are aimed at a full analysis of the situation, but just one piece of information: reminding people that there is significant collateral damage, and innocent people killed have names/etc., rather than just being units in some kind of RTS game.

People may decide that's unfortunate but ultimately still the right decision; as you note, it's not the only piece of information. But right now many people are not making that decision actively. I haven't surveyed people formally, but in my discussions around the subject very few people guess the death tolls are anywhere near the real numbers. Many people have the impression that, yes, the U.S. strikes are imperfect, but generally accurate and with only a handful of innocent people occasionally being killed.

Maybe people should maintain tallies of easily avoidable deaths:

Starvation, Poor infrastructure, poor medication, poor parenting, etc.

Lots of it is preventable. Should we keep tallies just so we know how (young) people are dying?

You know why people don't make a big deal about those greater tallies? Because it's not a political message which aligns with someone's particular politics. Not because they would be harder to influence.