Yep. There was a definite feeling of "elitist tastemaking" that permeated SA as it hit its peak and post-peak years. The forum regulars were consciously engaging in the performance of a forum post, rather than a forum post, which, in tandem with the banning and fees, developed towards an anxious, cynical, and insincere atmosphere ripe for toxicity - qualities which remain true of many of the prominent alumni. At the same time, it was productive for a certain kind of effortful, memetic content, which made it alluring and popular.
Because open hate clearly wasn't in good taste and tended to get moderated out, SA would more often focus on dogwhistle cues, e.g. furry groups instead of LGBT groups, [0] and then harass critics for not getting the joke. Material that originally developed from outside the forums was claimed and appropriated as it passed through. There were a lot of ways in which the claims to quality were overblown or outright false. Even so, I got curious and bought an account too, though I lost the password to it at some point.
[0] https://twitter.com/spacetwinks/status/728349066178998274
The thing that contributed most to SA's reputation, in my opinion, was the fact that it became an internet cultural norm that their choice of who to dehumanize, their morally grey tactics, and their edgy humour were beyond criticism even by sites and people who campaign against the exact same things elsewhere on the web. Imagine what Vice would say about a subreddit that did this, or harassed someone until they killed themself, or permabanned a woman because her boyfriend said she'd been raped at a community-related meet up by someone from the site, or...