No I think it is a bad idea
The lateral stability of the roll bar is dependant on that strut. With out it your primary rollover protection could just fold over.
You bring up RV-4 roll bars. I guess I see where you are driving. First the roll bar BTW do have diagonal struts to handle fwd/aft loads and deflection. I guess my first comment is the RV-6/7/9 does not have a roll bar to compensate. The back of the fuselage is not going to cut it.
I would call Van, but it is your backside. You are the builder and can modify it, but I do personally think (with out analysis but a good understanding of loads, geometry and flip-over event) it could be fatal.
Another wrinkle is this, insurance. Consider this not too far fetched scenario. You flip over and you or the passenger or both are hurt or worse. Lets say the roll bar folded back and you elected to not follow the kit manufactures plans and left of a structural member. The accident report comes out and this is mentioned, "builder elected not to install part of the roll bar structure". DO you think they will pay the medical, liability or death benefits to the survivors? This is not far fetched with similar legal precedence. Of course you could be sued. I always say build it to plans, light, simple and straight as you can.
I hate to be grim but flying is dangerous and I think Van installed the strut for a reason, design loads. I am smart but not that smart that I think I can design a better plane than Van. Again I would call the factory. I am sorry for getting dogmatic but when I hear about structural mods it gets my attention. George