If it's truly random, it should already be 50-52% female.
If it comes out 10% female every sortition cohort, you know some funny business is going on.
If it's truly random, it should already be 50-52% female.
If it comes out 10% female every sortition cohort, you know some funny business is going on.
If the sample size is low, it could come out at 10% purely at random, but that is still likely to undermine confidence in the system (in the immediate). Pragmatically, I think it makes sense to have quotas for a few protected classes, to maximize perception of fairness.
Isn't this a question of how many people you select?
Sure.
My point is that so is the percentage of males in any sortition cohort.
Therefore, a consistent female census of 10% or less in all sortition cohorts, would be as unlikely as a consistent male census of 10% or less in all sortition cohorts.
In other words, having one sortition cohort result in 10% males would not be suspicious. Having every sortition cohort result in 10% males would be suspicious in the extreme. So much so that we should start looking for whoever is "putting their finger on the scale" so to speak.