So, it was okay to flag it because some users were writing unreasonably vile comments? If this tactic works, then it would be a good way to get something flagged.
It's especially OK to flag things that are off-topic as per the guidelines:
Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.
as opposed to:
On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
If it was organic and from regular users, I would agree with you. However, I don't think it is, considering how targeted the flagging is.
If you don't agree with me, then at least consider the possibility. Wouldn't you want to make it harder for people to do that?
A number of flagged posts are vouched for, leading to posts being unflagged - such as the linked post which is no longer flagged.
You appear to be arguing that the ocean should be wetter.
What you are describing obviously doesn't work.