There is no moral obligation to have a diverse group, just to have a group that is tolerant of diversity, in the interest of fairness for members of minority groups. Encouraging actual diversity is just a strategy to avoid letting people who don't care about this stuff develop bubbles of intolerance in homogenous bubbles where intolerance isn't challenged regularly. The presence of diversity indicates a lack of intolerance, but a group consisting entirely of one demographic could be just as tolerant, and its homogeneity just a coincidence or a result of lack of advertising. So I find it a little strange when a group is "congratulated" on its diversity.
My post above was a super-passive expression of this.
Exactly this. The internet is the great equalizer. There is no need for anyone to know anything about me unless I choose to bring it up.
For a technical project, conducted and run over the internet, my work can stand entirely on its merits in a way that would not be possible in a regular office environment.
Does the color of my skin, my gender or my sexual orientation matter when providing feedback for a project such as this?
I would argue that those things are entirely irrelevant in this context, and wouldn't want them connected/associated with any contribution I made.
Put another way, your skin color, sexual orientation, gender, etc. likely will not change your contribution. But if it turns out that people of a particular skin color, sexual orientation, gender, etc. are somehow disincentivized from contributing, that's a problem.