[thrownaway114]

It is really worth considering that this conference used a blind review process[1]. Subsequently, there is zero chance that the reviewer's decisions were influenced by racism or sexism.

As a society, we need to consider the implications of what is going on here. In what way could this move possibly be said to be anti-racist/anti-sexist? It just isn't. If anything, abandoning your speakers because they are male/white (presumably), is itself bigoted. Consider how it would feel to be bumped from a speaker line up because of your race/gender.

[1] https://cfp.githubapp.com/events/electronconf-2017

[Normal_gaussian]

Blind review followed by them selecting for diversity.

They have an agenda and it hasn't got anything to do with code.

[huffmsa]

They realized they blindly selected and enjoyed topics submitted by the undiverse, and this is the discordant backlash.

"Oh God, I liked a talk by a white male! Cancel everything."

[indy]

It's an unfortunate sign that you felt the need to use a throwaway account in order to make such a statement.

[thrownaway114]

I know.

I am genuinely embarrassed not to associate my real name with my public speech. Having calculated the potential cost (and the low-impact of my message), though, it was either speak pseudonymously, or not at all.

[bluesign]

It is not totally blind, worse than that it is pro-diversity :)

'Speaker information will be used in any final reviews necessary to break ties and bring a balance to the speaking line-up.'

[thrownaway114]

One wonders how they they ended up with an all white group if the '...break ties and bring a balance to the speaking line-up' step had actually been applied?

[petercooper]

Pro-diversity, ex-conference (not this one) organizer here.

I can't speak for what GitHub did or didn't do, but a common problem is that there is a huge step before review that you can't skip. You must coach, encourage, and counsel the types of people you want to submit talks! If you don't, don't be surprised if they don't submit because of the treatment or impression they have from other events in the past.

Pro-active outreach to underrepresented groups is the way to get better events and a blind review process is no panacea despite many organizers seeming to think it is.

It's suggested here that they did blind review and then wanted to tweak for diversity. That's just not how it works. You need the diversity up front in the submissions.

[yorick]

However, there's might still be bias in who applies to speak at this kind of conference. They could have done more to reach out and encourage other groups to apply. I'd be interested to see the submission statistics.

[thrownaway114]

True. It would be very interesting to see who actually applied.