I fully respect DH's need to protect the many from the few, and I think it's right to do so. Any attack should be dealt with as quickly and as efficiently as possible. If it means pausing any number of the hosted sites, so be it. I'm not arguing against it.
What I'm merely wondering about is the decision to permanently stop hosting that website. How is that going to help? Apart from preventing a repeat attack to hit DH again, of course. The DDOS attack will hit DH's network anyway until the surge is over, regardless of whether the site is actually there or not. I understand that the only permanent protection is to detach the domain name from DH's network, meaning to stop hosting it, but that takes the usual days of global DNS propagation, right? How can it make a difference right when it happens?
I also don't disagree with your points that the victim must have done something to "deserve" the attack, but on the other hand, DH goes as far as hosting a lot of content that would be objectionable to the average good person, so where do you draw the line?
I'm only hosting two small private sites, completely non-offensive, so I wouldn't expect to get hit by DDOS myself. But what if? As somebody else mentioned, it only takes one script kiddie and one weekend to cause mayhem.