She gave an ultimatum: either doxx the people who said her paper was unfit, or she quits. Google didn't give into her demands so accepted her resignation and moved her end date up because of her browbeating.
(EDIT: Note that this particular process was not a peer review process - academic peer review is done by people from another institution, and selected by the venue after submitting a paper. This was a pre-submission internal review process which has never been billed as academic peer review.)
What makes you say this? Ultimately, the process is determined by Google. She had managers say she couldn't get that information. Why wouldn't that be the end of the conversation with regards to their identities?
Now it is technically true that management does not have to abide by it and can redefine the process at any time, but that doesn't mean saying "The established process is not an anonymous feedback process, what is going on" is doxxing anyone.
Last week at work I was told that a particular internal product was being wound down and was not considered strategic in 2021 planning, and I asked who expressed that desire because my team has a particular technical need for it and I think there are ways to run it more efficiently, and I wanted to have a conversation with them and find an answer that's good for the business. I would have been confused if I was told "I can't tell you that." Was I trying to dox someone?