The key tactical point was demonstrating an irrevocable critical mass of resistance which could not be crushed by force. The conflict between us protesters and people like you was driven by the fact that you didn't recognize this core point, overriding everyone's disagreements over political minutiae and bringing us together over the simple fact that we wouldn't allow each previous protest to be broken up by police violence without the next protest having more people and being more of a problem. The only way out was to convict a cop of a murder committed on duty. Otherwise people were going to be exercising their first amendment rights to express dissatisfaction with a police force unilaterally free to commit murder without consequences. Even people who want cops to be murderers should be able to wrap their heads around the fact that free speech forces itself on the world as a result of democracy and the human drive for expression. When you say you disagreed with the tactics without recognizing the core tactic of showing free speech couldn't be prevented, it's like you think free speech only worked because the protesters got lucky and you don't actually agree with the idea that free speech is an emergent property of human nature that you can't stop no matter how you feel about it.