Even here, you still haven't said anything specific. Everybody can agree that in some cases there is merit and some there is not, because that's true about everything. Everybody can agree that sometimes there's been over-reaction, because that's true about any topic where people have ever reacted. There is no need to say something that is always true.
If you're still wondering why people were downvoting, I'd say it was because you made objection-like noises without ever saying anything specific enough to serve as a real objection. If you'd like to object, by all means do it. Or if you'd like to avoid derailing with side issues, then just don't bring them up. But raising them while being vague reads to me like an attempt to undermine without taking responsibility, a way of clouding this issue a bunch of vague and unspecified junk.
I didn't want to dig into this specific case, as it seems to relate to gamergate, which is a lot of bad acting on all sides, especially those making physical threats of violence, and doxing people. Regardless of the merits of any underlying philosophy, such behavior is indefensible.
I'm not really right-wing, though do lean that way on a few specific issues. I'm very much of a pragmatic libertarian mindset. I tend to disagree with many on the left and right-wing viewpoints simultaneously. Even on the same issue.
It's not just a right wing talking point to say that there's been a lot of over-reaction to a great many things, and some of the actions coming out of our universities currently is pretty backwards. People have every right to be offended by things... they do not have a right to not be offended by anything. One's privilege ends where another's rights begin.
My intent was not to derail conversation into a spew of he-said/she-said or even to deteriorate into hyperbole. I was vague because in this case, there's merit. I was only mentioning that in a lot of cases there is not.