I think the general 'unofficial policy' that has been established is quite right - encouraging the forum not to feed ERV and link to ERV, and adding a health warning to any mentions of ERV's blog on this forum. Discussion of ERV is very likely to be divisive and unproductive here. Those whose blood pressure can tolerate obnoxious and unpleasant views can keep tabs on such things and report back as they feel appropriate.
I do wonder, though, about how this community might best handle such battlefronts, because there are contrary voices on ERV's post, from ME/CFS campaigners, and those can sometimes be effective, indeed it's important that there are counter-balancing opinions posted there. So I feel it might be worthwhile to get organised about who is monitoring such sites as this, and have some of our most informed members presenting the counter arguments there in the right way. To be effective on that particular blog, comments have to be purely science-based and avoid getting dragged into discussions of the offensive comments; discussion of the latter seems to be highly counter-productive there from what I've seen, most of the posters are interested only in the science and unconcerned about being offensive.
So it's just a suggestion, to the community, to consider whether anybody wants to organise such responses here. Of course there may be groups already doing so behind the scenes for all I know, and you may feel this is too 'organised' an approach, but I think in general we can be more effective if we concentrate our efforts appropriately, so personally I do feel that some such organisation of our response would be appropriate, if only I could figure out how to do it...so over to you to suggest ways if you think there's any merit in what I'm suggesting...