For a project named "Bro", I believe that we have a very open and inclusive community. We do play with the word a lot but it's all in the name of fun and very convenient since the name lends itself toward so much word play. There have been times where people have started to use it in the more modern pejorative sense and we've actively yet quietly made it stop. None of us on the core team like that behavior and with the name "Bro" we have to be extra careful with how it's used within the community.
There has been a number of women that have passed through our community and several that are actively involved at the moment (I could say the same about men, our team isn't very large).
I really like that people on this thread have been digging quote out of Vern's original paper about the lineage for the name. That's easily the best response to all of the "Why Bro?" questions.
Fortunately, there was at least some good discussion of the substance here!
When I was in the position to scan and choose between many hundreds of job applications and even on a mid-sized start-up, where only a few applications went in. No I am NOT a HR Person, absolutely not, but they asked me to do it, so I did that too.
EDIT: Not sure why this earned a downvote, but to your information there is no law forcing companies to let a % of women in for example (in the country I live).
It's just a mess. The tech looks interesting though, but it's really hard to take them seriously because of the name they chose.
Edit: Why is this getting downvoted? I pointed out my reaction to the title. I had never heard of it before so had no connection to their writings from 15 years ago. P.S. I didn't flag it.
> "Our monitoring system is called Bro (an Orwellian reminder that monitoring comes hand in hand with the potential for privacy violations)"
So Big Brother = Bro