[nuaccnt]

Probably not. (Except as an unusual coincidence.)

Picture from a python conference:

http://www.efytimes.com/admin/useradmin/photo/Pycon-UK.jpg

As in all the other pictures that appears from a google search it's >90% men. It's perfectly understandable that review panels will have >90% men on average, if they select for (presumably equally distributed among programmers) qualifications, passion and interest.

[illumen]

More than 50% of app purchasers are women, so there's definitely plenty of women who would be interested in doing this.

[nuaccnt]

If you want the average consumer to weigh in, fine. Look at download/purchase statistics, canvass users or do focus groups. If you want qualified, passionate and experienced programmers you're out of luck, those are mostly men. An overrepresentation (compared to the total number of candidates that would be good enough, of course some of them are women) it is bound to cost you something. Is having 50% (or whatever) women in open source related activity more important to you than having the best possible open source software?

[illumen]

More diversity in things like this does improve software. I learnt this at one of the fastest growing software companies in the world.

Do men know best what women want? No. Get women involved, and there is a better result.

If we don't begin to be inclusive, then Ubuntu will stay a closed mens club - and we will all be poorer for it.

[nuaccnt]

I'd say what for-profit companies do is the best indicator we have of the value of gender balance vs. just-making-something-people-want [to buy]--there's an imbalance in those too. Apple, for example, has an all male executive team. Microsoft has one woman (hr). Google has a few women (pr, hr/lobbying and marketing).

http://www.apple.com/pr/bios/

http://www.google.com/about/company/facts/management/

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/exec/slt.aspx

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/programming-and-development...

I expect an objection that assumes for-profit businesses don't act rationally to maximize profit, I won't pursue that.

[EliRivers]

"I expect an objection that assumes for-profit businesses don't act rationally to maximize profit, I won't pursue that."

Why not? Sounds like a valid objection that undermines your entire argument.

[nuaccnt]

It would be, if it was provably or probably true. I don't think it is. But I wasn't (and I'm not) going to spend an hour arguing the point.

Further reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_order

[wasd]

On Ubuntu?