> united by hatred of a scapegoat.

United by hatred of a scapegoat that they didn't choose on a random whim or due to some common agenda. Otherwise it's completely fine.

If someone rallied a hate-mob on 4chan, though, how would people know?

Since 4chan overtly resists it, it'd rapidly move off of there, but it's still a great place to find like-minded folks that'd follow someone to another server to go brigade someone.

4chan has always claimed to resist it, but 4chan was never immune to being shuffled a specific way.

Right, “not your personal army” was a quick way to decline to advance whatever doxx was being requested at that moment. Not an actual ethos. They regularly doxxed and swatted all sorts of people.

Immune is the extreme.

"claimed to resist but hasn't been immune" is reduction to absurd.

No it was a stock response to proposals for board/site raids from people who had lost an argument or been banned and wanted to retaliate (but without offering comedy potential). Kinda like when corporate people discovered flash mobs and tried to use them for free marketing.

Note that it is possible only because harassment, abuse and raids happened so frequently, it was a well know fact.

Not exactly something that makes 4chan people into ethical or moral.

A thing about the site is that comments not threaded or ranked. When the site started getting a reputation you had a lot of tourist beggars coming in fishing for free labor. NYPA is about getting those people to stop cluttering the place with garbage.