It might not feel striking if you put yourself outside your personal experiences/knowledge and read what you wrote in a vacuum, how a typical person would take it. People care a lot more about representation than they do about the perfection of that representation's demographic spread. People want both, of course (or at least people who tend to be on HN), but if you roll your eyes at some voices you disagree with and suggest tamping them down by removing things from their own political process (rather than e.g. focusing on getting more voices, rather than fewer, though it's a harder problem), despite there being a defensible point to be made about representativeness on some dimensions, even groups of people who are mostly smart/open are going to have a lot of folks who will not look past the offense of the suggestion.

Especially in times like this, where everybody is more rabid than ever to kill the voices of the others, and people seem less able than ever to imagine or respect experiences and perspectives outside their own mindspace of "this is how the everything should work".

Every system we come up with to apply justice to some instance we are familiar with has the potential to apply injustice to instances we are not familiar with. We have to make those tradeoffs sometimes, but we need to understand the tradeoff we're making, and not get caught up in the idea that we are simply correct and people who disagree are one big unified enemy entity.