Constructive Conflict and Going Towards the Heat
(יב) וַיִּשְׁלַ֣ח מֹשֶׁ֔ה לִקְרֹ֛א לְדָתָ֥ן וְלַאֲבִירָ֖ם בְּנֵ֣י אֱלִיאָ֑ב וַיֹּאמְר֖וּ לֹ֥א נַעֲלֶֽה׃
(12) Moses sent for Dathan and Abiram, sons of Eliab; but they said, “We will not come!
(כה) וַיָּ֣קָם מֹשֶׁ֔ה וַיֵּ֖לֶךְ אֶל־דָּתָ֣ן וַאֲבִירָ֑ם וַיֵּלְכ֥וּ אַחֲרָ֖יו זִקְנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃
(25) Moses rose and went to Dathan and Abiram, the elders of Israel following him.
וישלח משה וגו'. מכאן שאין מחזיקין במחלוקת, שהיה משה מחזר אחריהם להשלימם בדברי שלום:
וישלח משה וגו׳ AND MOSES SENT [TO CALL DATHAN AND ABIRAM] — From here we may learn that one should not persist in strife (Midrash Tanchuma, Korach 10), for, you see, Moses sought them out in order to conciliate them by peaceful words (Sanhedrin 110a).

(במדבר טז:כה) "ויקם משה וילך אל דתן ואבירם."

אמר ר"ל: מכאן שאין מחזיקין במחלוקת, דאמר רב: כל המחזיק במחלוקת עובר בלאו, שנאמר: (במדבר יז:ה) "ולא יהיה כקרח וכעדתו."

רב אשי אמר: ראוי ליצטרע - כתיב הכא "ביד משה לו" וכתיב התם: (שמות ד:ו) "ויאמר ה' לו עוד הבא נא ידך בחיקך."

§ With regard to the verse: “And Moses arose and went to Dathan and Abiram” (Numbers 16:25), Reish Lakish says: From here we derive that one may not perpetuate a dispute, as Rav says: Anyone who perpetuates a dispute violates a prohibition, as it is stated: “And he will not be like Korah and his assembly, as the Lord spoke by the hand of Moses to him” (Numbers 17:5). Even the aggrieved party must seek to end the dispute. Dathan and Abiram accused Moses and by right should have initiated the reconciliation. Nevertheless, Moses was not insistent on this; he went to them. Rav Ashi says: One who perpetuates a dispute is fit to be afflicted with leprosy. It is written here: “By the hand of Moses to him,” and it is written there: “And the Lord said furthermore to him: Put now your hand into your bosom. And he put his hand into his bosom; and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous, as white as snow” (Exodus 4:6). Based on the verbal analogy based on the term “to him” written in both verses, it is derived that the punishment for perpetuating a dispute is leprosy.

(נג) שפלוני יהיה חזן - ...היום שידוע שבעו"ה הרבה מחזיקין במחלוקת בלי טעם וריח וכונתם שלא לש"ש אם היו צריכין לשאול לכל יחיד ויחיד בענין המינויים בין לענין מינוי הש"ץ או מרביץ תורה ואב"ד בעיר וכל כה"ג לא היו מסכימים לעולם.

ע"כ הולכין אחר רוב פורעי המס ואפילו פסולי קורבי ביניהם [מ"א] ועכשיו המנהג שהולכין אחר ז' טובי העיר או אחר הנבררים מן הקהל ע"ז כל מקום ומקום לפי מנהגו [פמ"ג] והכל שלא ירבו המחלוקת...:

(53) That So-and-so should be chazan - ...Today, when it is known that, in our great sinfulness, many [among us] perpetuate disputes without any reason, and their intention is not for the sake of heaven, if we had to ask each and every individual regarding the matter of appointments, either of appointing the prayer leader or teacher or judge, etc., consensus would never be reached.

Therefore, we follow the majority of tax payers, even if there are invalid relatives among them. And now, that the custom is to follow the seven benefactors [?] of the city, or after those distilled/chosen by the community -- all follows the local custom, so that disputes do not multiply...

(יז) כָּל מַחֲלֹקֶת שֶׁהִיא לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם. וְשֶׁאֵינָהּ לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, אֵין סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם. אֵיזוֹ הִיא מַחֲלֹקֶת שֶׁהִיא לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, זוֹ מַחֲלֹקֶת הִלֵּל וְשַׁמַּאי. וְשֶׁאֵינָהּ לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, זוֹ מַחֲלֹקֶת קֹרַח וְכָל עֲדָתוֹ:

(17) Every argument that is for [the sake of] heaven's name, it is destined to endure. But if it is not for [the sake of] heaven's name -- it is not destined to endure. What is [an example of an argument] for [the sake of] heaven's name? The argument of Hillel and Shammai. What is [an example of an argument] not for [the sake of] heaven's name? The argument of Korach and all of his congregation.