That breaks the site guidelines against flamebait calling names in arguments. Casual bomb-throwing leads to flamewars, and you started numerous flames with just that one word. We're trying to avoid that here, so please don't.
You don't need that to make your point, so please stick to the rules.
If you see that the company is producing a good product that you're donating to support. Would the "customers" (supporters) want to support the time and cost associated with kicking out the CEO over personal+(believed to be) private activities? (Context: Brandon Eich donated 1k of his personal money to a conservative/anti-gay org, and an activist within mozilla found+escalated this and claimed hostile work environment, eventually got him removed)
If I was donating, I would be pissed to know that valuable time was wasted about that and the loss of talent of personal politics and disagreement.
Edit: "don't see any problem" does not mean I agree with the comment. It means I don't see any other place that it broke the site guidelines.
The GP should not have posted flamebait, and the repliers should not have taken the bait.
The L.A. Times published the CA state database of political donations >= $100 in size, activists searched it for known names. That was in 2012.
I mentioned this before and the claims were that you lost the "trust of the employees" infering that the work environment wasn't feasible. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23681475
I think for a private action that's insane. But oh well.