Thanks, this is the relevant part of the paper for that claim: > For outsiders, we see evidence for gender bias: women’s acceptance rates drop by 10.2% when t

Thanks, this is the relevant part of the paper for that claim: > For outsiders, we see evidence for gender bias: women’s acceptance rates drop by 10.2% when their gender is identifiable, compared to when it is not (2(df= 1;n= 18;540) =131;p < :001). There is a smaller 5.7% drop for men (2(df= 1;n= 659;560) = 103;p <:001). Women have a higher acceptance rate of pull requests overall (as we reported earlier),but when they are outsiders and their gender is identifiable, they have a lower acceptance rate than men Accepting arguendo that this is clear evidence of a gender bias, its effects are not as clearly pronounced as the tweet tries to imply they are.