Likewise, can we get some data providing (e.g.) negative indicators that race is a factor? A lack of correlation between gender/race and achievement would be useful.
As I said upthread, I don't think the burden of proof should rest solely on people who're questioning whether SV is basically a meritocracy. Either it's relatively easy to demonstrate that the claim is sound, or we have a lot more discussion ahead of us.
The important piece is not even so much to say categorically that "it's not a meritocracy," but to make the claim for data reciprocal. Ideally both positions should supply data, and in general I don't believe people expect data from folks who say "SV is meritocratic." People will rush to poke holes in people's arguments who claim the contrary, but I see a dearth of data & skepticism supporting the affirmative case.
If we're all supposed to be skeptical nerds, maybe we should apply a little more skepticism towards positions that, to skeptics like ourselves, would seem self-serving (i.e. it's basically is a meritocracy and therefore we needn't worry or take action).
You said: You are much, much more likely to get funded if you're a young white (or perhaps asian) guy doing an undergrad at Stanford than if you're a black woman studying at Berkeley.
Your data does not show this. You'd need the denominators as well, you have only the numerators.
