Agreed. It's shitty, but it's a lot like "cancel culture." It's just shitty. It's not nearly as harmful as the things it's fighting against. Cancel culture's biggest, ugliest manifestation: doublespeak. And yet, the "opposite" side of cancel culture (opposite only because that is how our current country position is--cancel culture "comes from liberals" and the opposite, say-and-do-whatever-the-fuck-you-want-and-damn-the-consequences-to-literally-the-entire-world culture, which "comes from conservatives") embraces doublespeak beyond anything I could have imagined. The current, literal manifestation of our political climate: the removal of women's rights, the dismantling of education, the manipulation of an entire subset of a population with a view toward the end of any remaining democracy, and so on. These are much bigger problems than someone being called out for saying something shitty. But they are less interesting to put in an article.

People like this might be annoying as fuck, criminal, and this action might be (in my opinion clearly is) useless and even destructive and against the point.

However, this changes nothing. We are still in a lot of trouble as a species. The dumb activist is still correct: we are fucked, and we must do something about it, or perish. And that is a much bigger problem than annoying activists.