I ask because Github attempted this while organizing ElectronConf a year ago, but it turned out their blind submission review process[1] resulted in an all-male panel. Someone noticed and got upset[2], after which Github canned it. There was an HN discussion about it too[3].

Now we can speculate how many submissions were from people that don't identify as male (was it 50 or less%? Github hasn't released details to my knowledge). The issue though is that once the results (of what appears to be a fair process) didn't match the desired narrative, people screamed sexism and made mostly emotional arguments.

You've mentioned an "inter-generational correction schema" elsewhere in the thread. In most institutions, this essentially gets instated as quotas which embitters the majority in the system (including the people they target to enable because it's assumed they had to get past a "lower bar").

[1] https://archive.is/8SsNp#selection-381.122-494.0 [2] http://archive.is/NrLqE [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14480868

Indeed, and I agree. I've tried to be careful from assuming specific norms, trying to think through the positive/observational aspects instead.

Applying the selection quota to the hiring pool that passes skills would get around the "quota-implies-less-skilled" issue.