Stated opinion above does not apply to dog shaming. That shit's funny.
PUBLIC SHAMING SHOULD NEVER BE YOUR FIRST COURSE OF ACTION. EVER. PERIOD. WE ARE ADULTS.
She should have approached the PyCon organizers first if she didn't feel comfortable confronting her offenders directly. She should have not have further broken the PyCon code of conduct by publishing a photograph of her offenders. She also should not have stayed silent if she was offended. There's nothing wrong with voicing your opinion on something that offends you, but it doesn't mean you have to publicly shame people you don't even know. He made a dongle joke. Was it appropriate? Probably not. Was it appropriate for Richards to make a much bigger deal out of it than it was? Probably not. Was it appropriate for Richards to then go on to comparing herself to Joan of Arc like some kind of martyr for women's rights? Definitely not. Richards IS NOT A HERO. Is she a villain? No, but definitely not righteous and framing herself as such is just as immature as dongle jokes.
She DID NOT approach the organizers first. She composed a tweet with a photo of her offenders and published it. She approached the organizers after they (and the rest of her online audience) had already seen the tweet.
I don't know (and neither does anyone else except those directly involved in the fiasco) what the joke was aside from involving the word "dongle." So there is certainly a question of whether or not the joke was offensive enough to warrant the actions Richards took.
I am in no way condoning death threats or doxxing attempts. Those kinds of things are never appropriate either. She is right for standing up for herself and saying something when she felt offended, but the way she went about it was wrong in almost every possible way. Even when confronting an offender, good human beings still have a responsibility to be polite and non-offensive in their confrontation. Two wrongs don't make a right.