you have to realize that any time you disagree with the administration on this or any such fan site, that you're going to get it from the administration's social media army on one side, and from fans who see backing IU on anything and everything as the loyal thing to do..
on a forum like IU FB where there aren't a ton of posters, that social media army will usually far outnumber detractors.
so just state your case, and accept going in that the university's white corpuscles will see you as an invading entity, and fight you off.
if they can't credibly rebut you on the merits because their case is weak, then they'll assault you personally in a "kill the messenger" move.
so once they are assaulting you personally instead of debating you on the merits, you know they know they have no case.
i wish things weren't like this, but it is what it is.
if your case is strong, some will see through all the blow back.
that said, being all negative on everything all the time, does hurt your cred when a dissenting voice does need to be heard.
Your hypothesis is correct. The problem is you have it completely reversed. He has done 99.9% of the personal a attacks with no backup to his claims. I offer him an olive branch and an easy way to join in a robust debate. We shall see if he takes it.