That is not the issue here, a range of different types of hostility were catalogued. Some are I'd say excessively hostile but essentially just dissenting opinion. I don't see anything in the article or opinion here suggesting that sort of speech should be suppressed or interfered with. Do you?
Others were explicit death threats or persistent personal harassment. I think we can agree those are a potentially criminal matter, right?
Insulting people publicly for their support of legal rules is socially acceptable only in the Facebook age. In other times, the person on the receiving end would have challenged you to a duel.
