I have finally figured out what is wrong with the article in the Slant, other than it is JUST WRONG to treat anyone that way.
Frannie proposed ideas. Her adversary responded not by saying that he disagreed with her ideas and then argued his ideas. He said that he disliked her ideas and that he disliked her, rather viciously. This is not the sort of civil discourse that a university should promote. Unpopular ideas need to be given room for expression, without fear of intimidation.
If such intimidation is not checked, then we will be left only with articles of the intellectual merit of discussing the Lambda Chi Watermelon Smash.