Sorry, I missed this earlier. Could you give an example so I can better understand what you mean?
I will try.
Two sides: Floating ASIs and Racial ASIs.
Floating ASI: We do not want racial choices to alter our class choice. Or. We do not want to be hampered in our primary attribute because we choose to be a specific race. Or. We dislike seeing the same race/class combos always being played, and Racial ASI's are the primary promoter of this.
(I think that is correct. Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.)
Racial ASI: We do not want the race's to lose their attribute distinctness. Or. We like seeing the same race/class combos. Or. We do want players to be hampered in their primary attribute when choosing a specific race.
(Optional)
The reason why behind these is more interesting than what they are. For example, why would anyone like seeing the same race/class combos? For world building it might be really nice. To see the same combo over and over, and then you roll up with a unique combo, it makes you stand out. Another example, why would anyone want their player hampered in their primary attribute? A zero to hero mentality could explain it. Puny farmer becomes the greatest warrior. It might coincide with the unique character path stated above. Reasons are opinion. That's it. It is hard to change opinions because each table is different.
Now, how does all this relate to a blind eye?
My example was, when creating a game, you have knobs. Character creation in D&D has the following knobs:
HP, Speed, Attributes, Skill and Tool Proficiencies, Weapon and Armor Proficiencies, and Racial Feats.
In my opinion, these other knobs seem to be removed from the argument, as if they didn't exist. The only knob looked at is Racial ASI, and how on some characters at level one, you can only turn the knob to 3, while some you can turn to 4. So we (myself included) seem to be only staring at the Racial ASI knob.
I gave some specific examples earlier. A mentioned the wood elf barbarian that has a movement speed greater than any other race/barbarian in the game. 45' per turn, and able to use a bonus action for another 45'. So 90' per turn. No dwarf can ever do that. So is the trade off of speed worth starting off with a 15 strength instead of 16? In my opinion, the answer was yes. Plus, I had a better initiative and could use mask of the wild, which for someone who moves 90' is a big deal. Again, does that outweigh the +1? It seems no one is bothering to answer that, hence turning a blind eye to these racial feats which greatly empower any barbarian who chooses the totem path of the Eagle. (Which also gives disadvantage on opportunity attacks, so you can imagine this elven warrior weaving in and out of enemies for 90' a turn and still attacking! Or worse yet, moving 45' towards the target, attacking, then moving 45' away!)
Apply a floating ASI to that example. The question arises, why would anyone choosing totem path of the eagle be anything other than a wood elf? There is no trade off. Just good heaped upon great.
This line of thought can be applied to all these dials because D&D is table dependent.