“Not as you incline to good, so you incline to evil” for whippings

The Sages demanded this law from the verse: “You shall not be after many rabbis in evil, nor shall you punish many rabbis for their sins: (Exodus 23:2).”
How did they come to the conclusion that this verse does not apply to the laws of whipping?
On page 3: Toss, they explain that “to be after all” means “bad for all,” i.e., the laws of souls, but in the laws of property, there is a right for one and a duty for another.
This explains well why the verse is not demanded for the laws of property, but on the face of it, the law of whipping is also “bad for all.”

According to the rabbi's suggestion that the severity of personal injury law is the cause, does this mean that this is a "revealing" sermon, meaning that the sages were looking for a verse that would justify their argument that the power of the majority in personal injury law should be limited?

In the Mishnah of the Sanhedrin, there is a dispute about how many lashes should be in a beid. Legally, it is like a coin. In any case, it remains that souls are a category unto themselves.
It is clear that the Sages had an opinion to be stricter about souls, but I do not know whether the details of the law would have come from their opinion. Simply put, they do not come from the verse itself.