I believe there is room for curiosity around what may be the cause of perceived differences in audio quality from different network configurations, but I also hold to the idea that those who preach against relatively established science bear the burden of proof.
Asking for scientifically generated evidence is not bullying. It is healthy skepticism in this battle against audio snake oil.
I am not against someone posting their subjective experience, but someone posting that a change in network switch improved bass without any scientifically generated evidence isn’t pushing the discussion forward one iota. This really is what causes the uproar - it’s someone saying they saw Bigfoot but didn’t take a picture or find any tracks. What response does one expect?
Here’s what I wrote 5 years ago about this debate: How can the shaman talk to the physicist?