"...then the OCA is so largely ex-Protestant one must woder if we a conflict of interest here."
Actually, it is Protestant converts who have the least beef about being baptized into Orthodoxy. There is more resistance amongst cradle Orthodox in the OCA to the practice, even though it doesn't affect them.
The root of this bias in the OCA is not the presence of Protestant converts, but is far more likely to be the heavily *Uniate* background of the OCA, with its attendant Catholic theological and ecclesiological baggage. Part of this is manifested by holding to certain Catholic theological/ecclesiological thought-forms, such as the idea of "valid" Baptisms outside the Church (Catholicism accepts *all* Protestant Trinitarian baptisms, and would consider baptizing any such person to be a sin).
Part of it is manifested by a reaction *against* other things "Western" that are simply Christian, but not expressed in Eastern form. Much of this stems from the fact that writers like Schmemann used the distinctiveness of Orthodoxy to gain academic recognition on the American scene.
Don't ask me to explain how each is arrived at...
I agree with most what your wrote. My parish priest is an ex Prot and he has been quite vocal in saying that his former co-religionists need to baptized when they convert.