might ask themselves why is it, that 30 or so regular posters all manage to agree that one person is a disruptive influence.

-- or might ask themselves why it is that said regular members are unwilling or unable to cite factual support for their views.
-- or might ask themselves what the views would be of previous members who, having received nastiness*, are not longer with us or are posting far less than before.

Have we a selected sample, Helen, one from which some members have driven out or cowed the voices that might disagree with you? That's a factual question, on which you and I may reach differing conclusions -- but would you agree that it's a question that merits mature consideration?

PS: dear Helen, would that we had as many as 30 regular posters.