“Revenge” or “closing a personal account” when this is contrary to the public interest

peace
A question of a follow-up question.
When a person wants to personally settle accounts with a figure who has wronged him. Or you could also call it revenge. Especially when this is done not out of a desire for revenge alone but also to ensure that the object of the end will not continue to harm his personal development (spiritual, intellectual, religious, etc.). But on the other hand, it is clear that this action will benefit that individual but will harm the whole. How do you think that person should act? Is it appropriate to put the personal injustice aside for the good of everyone else and not let personal feelings or personal motives “bribe” the higher considerations?
 
Countless such examples can be cited.
The question came to my mind when I watched the program “Connected” by Hanoch Daum. In an episode where he talks about the experience he remembered badly in the yeshiva where he was raised. According to his description, his living conditions were substandard. The education was very strict. Which, according to his testimony, caused him difficulties in faith and development later on. Is it appropriate from a moral-spiritual perspective to publish a story of this kind, even if it may “in a big way” – for example, in the name of the yeshiva – and indirectly, also cause those with the potential for greatness and spiritual development to “get stuck” – because they will withdraw or not want to study there and prefer a place of study at a lower level? Michael Ben-Ari said on a radio program where he hosted Hanoch together with Itamar Ben-Gvir that a person who has doubts and falls in faith should sit at home and keep his mouth shut and not publish books about it, because it is clear that this is a matter of personal consideration and personal release. And this does not contribute to anyone else. And it can even give legitimacy to others who are in religious dilemmas to take the package apart. And I think there is something true in his statement. And that in cases where a person feels the need to shout and speak, there should be a consideration of whether he is shouting and speaking solely for his own personal benefit. Or is he doing it to promote an idea that seems right to him?
I want to take this example and expand it to more extreme cases. If in the past, a person experienced terrible personal harm while studying in a yeshiva or some other Torah institution. A terrible physical harm, for example, that affected him later in life. Or someone spoke ill of him that prevented him from advancing to other high-quality educational institutions. From the educator’s perspective, because it would motivate him to discipline (and perhaps because it was not considered taboo at the time). And today that same educator is a great figure who helps many with faith, halakhah, and thought. Is it appropriate to publish? Or is it appropriate to remain silent because it could prevent many from using him?
Is Ger Tzedek, for example, someone who felt that his face had been whitewashed and that he was not being properly accepted because of stigma and racism, and not because of unkosher actions (assuming that he does indeed keep all the commandments), appropriate for him to publish such things? On the one hand, he is violating an explicit Torah prohibition, and on the other hand, creating a commotion over the incident could fuel controversy among the people, cause desecration of the name of heaven even in the wider world, and so on.