I agree that attacking 4chan is a bad idea, but the 4chan problem users aren't the ones who keep their behavior on 4chan. They are the ones who think that, since they think X, anyone who doesn't agree with them must be attacking them and thus must be dealt with using the harshest of threats (including bodily injury and/or death) and hacking attempts. If anyone supports their target or opposes them, they become a target as well.
When you need to resort to death threats and intimidation to "win" your disagreement, then you've not only lost the argument but have moved into the areas of harassment or worse.
Think you need to add citations these buddy. Or is this the type of argument that doesn't need proof?
Not saying 4chan is a heaven of angels, but the wide brushing + ad hominem argument without proof is rarely the right way to go.