The only winning move is to not play.

True in a way. But in such a situation the better option is always not to act and invoke plausible deniability. Otherwise we will see repeated efforts.

Although 8chan is probably just a sacrificial anode for 4chan and some other sites, the pressure of censors will probably not subside for a while. Even if their chances are slim, it is really bothering how quickly people throw away rights just to have an opportunity to point their fingers on people they believe are worse than themselves.

Why do you reply to a post you find deficient without offering alternative suggestions while simultaneously assuming I'm holding a narrative?

Someone suggested this was an action not of publicity but of mob action, and I merely remarked that I'm not sure which one I find to be worse. Both possibilities concern me.