Then how will you notice if some of the people doing technical things are specifically giving more insight or more benefit of the doubt based on gender, sexuality, skin tone, culture, or religion?

If you are not paying attention, you're open to abuse. Hopefully there is no abuse; most people are good at heart. But you have no way of knowing. This strikes me as an un-technical way to approach problems, especially if you know that there are problems in other projects.

> Then how will you notice if some of the people doing technical things are specifically giving more insight or more benefit of the doubt based on gender, sexuality, skin tone, culture, or religion?

We don't care. Or, to be completely intellectually honest, at least I don't. I'm interest in the output and the ideas that are shared. The input is none of my business. I judge people for their relevant behavior, not their state.

Sorry, I guess I was a bit unclear. You don't care, sure. But someone working in the project with you might decide to exercise bias, for lots of reasons. (Maybe they grew up indoctrinated into bias, and it's hard to shake. I grew up in the Southern US, I get that.) Do you know that you will notice? If you're only paying attention to output and ideas, does it matter to you if the output and ideas are only coming from certain people?

You might decide, of course, that if you're getting enough output or ideas, you don't need all the new contributors you might get, and if you only get those that get past people's biases, that's enough. I would be unhappy about that, personally, but it's clearly possible to make a thriving open-source project with such a philosophy.

In my experience, the top contributors tend to have open minds. In practice, I have not run into much bigotry with the people I associate with, except for the occasional newcomer who is quickly asked to leave.