My wife says it's the result of too much bourbon over too many years.

However, do recall these are principles, not rules -- therefor the interpretation is broad. In your scenario, I suggest it IS necessary for the insurgents to mobilize (their peculiar type of combat power) at a decisive point and time to achieve temporary superiority. An example would be the massing of local citizens in Afghanistan to protest US air strikes insuring that foreign TV cameramen were present while doing so -- no intent to destroy the opponents forces but only to influence opponents actions by swinging public opinion. Another is the disruptive fights and tactics in the Iraqi Parliament to protest possible acceptance of the SOFA.

Yet another is the currently favored massive use of IED and suicide bombers to achieve not a temporary military superiority or an expected physical destruction of the enemy but to psychologically convince the voters of nations involved in operations to withdraw their troops simply due to upset and annoyance at the loss of even small numbers of troops with little apparent progress. Since each strike is by itself inconclusive, they mass the number of strikes in an attempt to obtain a conclusive result.

All those provide or seek a temporary superiority of one sort or another over their opponents by the application of more than ordinary effort at a point or time when it is believed advantage may be accrued. Of course, if the insurgents are engaged in any combat operations, then the more directly attributable and combat power related 'mass' -- more people (or firepower) at one point than the COIN effort can muster -- applies.