I started to read the pdf but stopped. Just a little bit in and it struck me as complicated, and that’s as someone familiar with ranked choice voting, proportional voting, etc. Not that complexity is inherently bad, but when it comes to group decision making, elegant solutions will encourage many people to participate. Complicated solutions will favor people with lots of time or money.

I also don’t think weighing systems so that certain people have more of a say than others is ideal. It’s true that experts know more than lay people. But there are challenges in identifying and labeling experts, deciding what being an expert in a given subject should mean in terms of more power/influence, and in doing so creating mechanisms for gaming the system.