I'd argue it's not exactly the same thing as celebrities though. Celebrities are in another sphere altogether, talking shit about them is inconsequential or at least perceived as such (whether it's actually true... who knows ?). Yeah every discussion is a signal boost, but really do NeoGAF airing the latest allegations and photos of any use to the matter of hand ? This info is still out there for those who wish to find it.
It doesn't settle once and for all the actual main debate on GAF either (Should a company ignore info depending on where/why it is coming from ?), which will stay largely hypothetical because the actual timeline of what Nintendo knew, when and how will probably stay with the company and Rapp unless it ends up in court. So does the actual level of support (or absence of) she received from her colleagues or her management.
But anyway, I'm not privy to whatever reasoning is behind the discussion being curtailed. By design, moderator policy on GAF is always driven by personal opinions of the staff, so it wouldn't be surprising it's in the mix, it happened in the past.
EDIT : To be clear, I also agree that it turns GAF into another kind of echo chamber, just a slightly less toxic one.
