Yup - it's wild, isn't it? There is an interesting (technical) analysis of the process - https://rangevoting.org/HPL-2007-28R1.pdf - where they make the points that the system could be rigged by making sure that you have a well placed boy waiting outside to make the first selections, and that if there is a faction of 43 people from different families if at any time they are able to gain control of any stage they can then control the whole thing to the end. The suggested reason for the complexity - a form of "security theatre" - because it was so complex everyone would believe that it was impossible to be gamed.
Apparently, in ancient China, when a vote was held on a major issue (such as whether or not to go to war), councillors would place either a black or white pebble in an urn. When the pebbles were counted, it was not the number of’ford’ or’againsts’ that mattered / it was which number was the luckiest!
I was dimly aware that the election of a doge was an arcane process, but I didn't know the half of it!
Yup - it's wild, isn't it? There is an interesting (technical) analysis of the process - https://rangevoting.org/HPL-2007-28R1.pdf - where they make the points that the system could be rigged by making sure that you have a well placed boy waiting outside to make the first selections, and that if there is a faction of 43 people from different families if at any time they are able to gain control of any stage they can then control the whole thing to the end. The suggested reason for the complexity - a form of "security theatre" - because it was so complex everyone would believe that it was impossible to be gamed.
Apparently, in ancient China, when a vote was held on a major issue (such as whether or not to go to war), councillors would place either a black or white pebble in an urn. When the pebbles were counted, it was not the number of’ford’ or’againsts’ that mattered / it was which number was the luckiest!
Ooo - that's fascinating!