I wrote a long post on the previous thread, and hit 'post' just as the thread filled up, so my wise words were lost for all eternity. However, I shall try to remember them, and to type fast enough that I can post them before this thread fills up! 
I posted on the original thread to say that I felt that the tone overall was bullying and unpleasant, and that I felt that that was counterproductive - as others have said, you are far more likely to get someone to listen to your advice if it is being given without a huge side order of anger (though I absolutely understand why someone who does the work that Vallhala/DBF does would feel angry).
I saw the thread when TLES got the dog, and was so strongly advised to give it to a rescue centre, and having spoken to TLES about it, and read what was on that original thread, it was my opinion that she did improve the dog's circumstances and quality of life substantially - even though she didn't follow all the advice she was given.
I also think that she has been honest enough to say that she now thinks that it may not be the best thing for her to keep the dog - and this provided a perfect opportunity for someone to persuade her to rehome the dog via a respected rescuer, but that this opportunity was lost in the general rush to leap on her with anger and with some nasty personal remarks too (saying she was probably dirty - had filthy fingernails and speculating about her punishing her child).
It was very clear to me from TLES's thread about rehoming the dog that there was a general belief that there was only one way to successfully rehome the dog - and that was DBF's way. Posters on that thread suggested that the new home in Hertfordshire was a total invention (to cover up the fact that the dog was being pts - implied by saying that 'going to a farm in the country' was a way parents used to lie to their kids when a loved pet was pts). No-one stopped to consider that TLES might have found a suitable new home for the dog - instead, on absolutely NO evidence whatsoever, it was assumed that the new owners would be at best, entirely useless and would end up rehoming the dog sooner rather than later, or at worst, that they were puppy farmers or worse. It seemed more important to attack TLES than to give any credence to the idea that she might just have given some time and care to deciding how to rehome her dog.
I think that the best advice given on the original thread, which was sadly lost in the flood of anger, was that TLES should rehome the dog to the people she had found, via a recognised and experienced rescuer, who could work with the dog before rehoming her, check the new home and new owners, and provide ongoing support afterwards, taking the dog back into the rescue if the rehoming did not work.
I don't think DBF was the worst offender on the deleted thread. I have seen other postings by her that are helpful and supportive, and tbh, have not seen the postings that have caused MNHQ to warn and ban her in the past. I do think she has a lot of useful information, and has obviously done a lot to help posters on here before, and if she could accept that she needs to tone down her approach a lot more - because that will make it far more effective - then I would support the call to reinstate her.