The irony is that the creep hunters, e.g. "Samantha" themselves want to remain anonymous.
But aside for that, although I find CreepShots and the like abhorrent, e.g. a teacher posting photos of his students online, I find what people like "Samantha" are doing almost equally bad. Contacting people's employers and esp. the police on an alleged crime as the first step seems not only cruel and unusual punishment but may in fact may be illegal. What if "Samantha" makes an error in her identification and contacts my employer?
I don't want to comment on the "In my personal opinion, not all speech deserves to be protected..." comment, which has hundreds of years of debate on it. But "Samantha's" assertion that
"But Samantha believes that CreepShots is a gateway drug to more dangerous hobbies. Fetishizing non-consent "indicates [that CreepShots posters] don't view women as people, and most will not be satisfied with just that level of violation," she said. "I want to make sure that the people around these men know what they're doing so they can reap social, professional, or legal consequences, and possibly save women from future sexual assault. These men are dangerous."
is quite indefensible, to me. The idea that porn (not that these pictures are porn) will lead to predatory behavior was the leading cry of old-school feminism, but is not so widely accepted.