It certainly could be, but that post fundamentally lacked any defensive qualities and did nothing other than aim to undermine libertarians. Within libertarian circles one might say they aren't crying over it, but to advocate for violence? No way. There wasn't some big strategic move here other than to make it appear as if libertarians advocate for violence when its the opposite that is true. Libertarians don't have the numbers or means such that advocating violence would even make strategic sense. We may be a threat, but its in politics not war. The qualities of the post suggest pretender libertarians with another motive. It is the opposition, both right and left that advocates violence. Libertarians are fundamentally against the use of the state which is itself built on violence.