I would think trying to defend 400 libel/defamatory tweets takes up quite a bit of resources too; if done one-by-one. So, Soye's lawyer is gonna get paid (doubt it) or have to gloss over them all and defend them in a broad brush. In which, some might be legit libel & some might not, but to defend them all together makes for a weak defense.While @AnOminous has covered the legal side of it, this is also a favourite tactic by, I believe, Mr Hughes of BHBH.
They did this against a contractor who did a shitty job and they catalogued every single issue with photographs into a slideshow. By issue 4 the guy was still sitting relatively confident, by 104 he'd slumped onto the desk.
They had in excess of 200 such issues catalogued and ready to continue hitting them with.
The lawyer immediately began to talk settlement deals.
The whole point is, as said, PR and psychological warfare. If you're making the other side slowly die inside, imagine what it'd do to a jury or a judge? As you have to stand there and go through all 400 of these tweets before them, showing every instance of the shit spewed?
They're going to want to give you the death penalty even if its not an option in the case in hand. They're going to fucking hate your guts before your lawyer even stands up to try and defend your soy chugging ass.
You overwhelm them in information or examples to ensure that only one story is told, in this case the truth.