Sure, perhaps some wouldn't, but it seems that from the point of view of the Linux Foundation what the majority would provably feel was more important.

Regardless of what they might feel (which, contrary to your assertion, has yet to be proven) the actual threat posed by a middle-aged man who once wore a MAGA is essentially zero.

Protecting participants against actual harm and harassment is a legitimate reason for revoking a person's ticket to an event. Trying to pretend that you don't have to share a country with millions of people who voted for its sitting president is not.

I personally share this sentiment of yours; I particularly dislike how "cancel culture" is increasing divide and lack of dialog in our societies. In my opinion though this was still a dilemma, which was obviously poorly handled (Twitter is in no way the correct place for this sort of things).

My initial post simply attempted to answer your question by explaining the rationality I believe the Linux Foundation followed here.