Atomic, you have nothing to be sorry for.
You provide an immeasurable amount of knowledge, data, assistant and support to all the women on here.
Our sways didn't fail because of something you did or didn't say, they failed because of bad luck.
Swaying, by the very definition of the word, is only at best a marginal likelihood of potentially altering the outcome, we all undertake swaying knowing full well that really it's still just a roll of the dice, of course it hurts when it doesn't work, of course we look for answers as to 'why' it didn't work, but for some things in life there simply are no answers.....and who gets what gender and why is one of those things for which there are no answer for. Why does a 30 year old who has never smoked, die of lung cancer, whilst a 85yr old that has smoked a pack a day their entire lives is still alive and kicking?? Just because the pack a day smoker didn't get lung cancer doesn't mean that smoking doesn't cause cancer - it does. And in that same vein, just because many of the sways have failed on here doesn't mean that swaying doesn't work, for some people it does.
When I have asked questions and made comments about the statistical anomaly that seems to be happening in this thread, please know that I am not questioning you, your knowledge, or the advice that you have give out. I'm a numbers person through and through. My entire day job is statistical analysis, lots of mind numbing data crunching, analysing, forecasting, identifying anomalies, basically explaining and justifying everything in numbers, probability and statistics. Being a numbers persons I automatically scratch my head when numbers just don't add up......and as far as the contributors in this thread go, the gender split doesn't make statistical sense, and is well outside of what I would understand to be normal gender splits. It's stood out to me, and I've commented on it and questioned it, but in that questioning its not YOU or any information and advice that YOU have provided that I am questioning just the statistical anomaly. It's not the high number of failed sways that make me scratch my head, but the unusually high number of boys - sway or no sway. I get that sways will and do fail, what I haven't got is why the gender split here is nowhere near the 51/49 average.
I hope you understand what I'm saying, I have always held you in high regard and have a great deal of respect for you, your knowledge and the information you provide, and that respect hasn't changed because my sway failed, or because so many of the sways in this group of have failed - I realise that that's something that has come down to bad luck, an unusually high concentration of bad luck, but just bad luck all the same.
So long waffle aside, you have nothing to be sorry for, and I don't think that anybody ever could, or would, blame you for their gender outcome.