Generally I find myself very doubtful of anyone who complains about not being able to share dissenting opinions without actually saying what those dissenting opinions are.
Because two people said this, and frankly it's stupid, I'll give my view: if you give examples, you immediately have people start debating the validity of the examples with you, instead of the actual topic. And so people like you and the other person (no idea of your actual intentions obviously) seem to pop up and say "oh, what opinions do you mean" to try and tell them their opinion is extremist or whatever. It's a bush league online debate tactic, whether intentional or not.
Honestly? Too bad. Abstract arguments without concrete examples tend to over or under weight specific outcomes, which ruins practical discussion.
Say what you think you can’t, and be prepared for others to also say what they think of what you say. Your speech doesn’t get special treatment just because you went first.