"Both of these minority shareholders are advocating BORROWING money to pay out as dividend? "
Because they argue that as a corporation Dell should fund more of itself by debt rather than equity, and note that it is a proposed "special dividend", so what that really means is a one off return of "surplus" cash to shareholders. And you say "what sane lender..." but it's not that unusal to return cash to shareholders whilst increasing a company's borrowings.
As a general rule you wouldn't want companies you own hoarding cash, you'd rather have it returned to you to invest elsewhere (because if the company earn a higher return on capital than the cost of borrowing, you'd be better off). In this case it's less clear because Dell already have (by sector standards) a fair pile of debt. The "give me my cash" argument works a lot better if you're talking about companies like Apple, sitting Smaug-like on a huge pile of cash that is (by rights) due to investors, and having no debt.
Personally I don't give a hoot either way. I wouldn't buy or recommend a Dell computer, and I wouldn't invest in them either, so all I see here is a dispute between megabuck investors over how they think they should share the pie. I'm sure the people who finally pay the price will be Dell's employees, as the new owner seeks to cane the organisation for cash.