I think that may be the the point, to get too many people from acting on what they have enough of, to "let's talk some more first". Such discussion wasn't requ

I think that may be the the point, to get too many people from acting on what they have enough of, to "let's talk some more first". Such discussion wasn't required of anyone before they were allowed to express support or praise, so why would it be required from anyone who reached the point of boycott or criticism, before they are granted that they have reached that point? I mean, it's fine to ask people why they think what they think of Facebook, but why refuse to accept others are moving for good reasons, maybe for better reasons than others have for not moving -- and ask them questions while letting them pass, without attempting to delegitimize them until they "explained themselves"?