It's okay to cancel the cancellers. In fact, the expected outcome of this effort is to 'cancel' the cancellers, by not allowing their complaints to translate into institutional action. They are free to argue others should be canceled, but no one should listen to them. Given that they are currently listened to, preventing that is indeed a form of cancellation, and it's a good one. You cannot and should not expect to benefit from the very policy you denigrate.
You can just stop right there! Either it's okay to cancel, or it isn't. "It's okay to cancel those that I don't like, but not cancel those I do like" is infantile reasoning and not to be taken seriously.
It has nothing to with what I don't like. I don't believe you should extend to people those rights they argue against.
For example, if someone wrote a comme t on hacker news saying "not all people should be able to comment on hacker news", one wonders why it is that they ought to enjoy the very right which they seek to deny.
I have said quite clearly in my comment that those wishing to cancel ought to be heard... They just ought no to be listened to. Perhaps if you read my comment (it's only a few sentences long... There's no need to be thick headed), you would have read that part.
