When you have secret ballots then each of the 5 people's vote is worth the same. That means your less capable men will be scored equally to your more capable men.

The thing about having 1 person in charge is that he gets to see the men grading the women so he can make a judgement as to the quality of those men. Who do you think would be better at rating women? The neckbeard fat guy with an anime shirt or the tall dark handsome guy who clearly scores with women all the time? The guy in charge gets to see the men who are ranking the women in two separate groups then make a determinant himself. If any of the groups are way out of line he can rule on it himself, if both groups agree he can agree, if one group has a major difference over another group, he can gauge which group is probably more accurate.

Just on racial bias he can compute that himself too. For example if the group of 2 blacks place the black girl first and the group of two whites place her last, he'll immediately see the inherent bias and correct for it in the manner he feels is right. He may correct for it wrong by taking an equal weighted average but maybe he is smart enough to determine that blacks only represent 15% of the total pop so maybe you place the black girl second from the last instead of last rather than in the middle etc... Even if he places he in the middle, that is likely where she would have fell with secret ballots so at worst he's the same in such a scenario but he has an opportunity to be better. This can all be processed by a human who is seeing what's going on. A secret ballot is going to have the inherent bias of the fact you only have a 5 person sample size which might not be a proper reflection of the total pop etc...

So many reasons but the crux of it is that people aren't equal so weighting everyone's vote as equal doesn't necessarily constitute as good of an outcome as you would from simply having your higher quality and more capable people choose. That's something a human in charge given the scenario I present might be more readily able to accomplish.

When you have secret ballots then each of the 5 people's vote is worth the same. That means your less capable men will be scored equally to your more capable men.

The thing about having 1 person in charge is that he gets to see the men grading the women so he can make a judgement as to the quality of those men. Who do you think would be better at rating women? The neckbeard fat guy with an anime shirt or the tall dark handsome guy who clearly scores with women all the time? The guy in charge gets to see the men who are ranking the women in two separate groups then make a determinant himself. If any of the groups are way out of line he can rule on it himself, if both groups agree he can agree, if one group has a major difference over another group, he can gauge which group is probably more accurate.

Just on racial bias he can compute that himself too. For example if the group of 2 blacks place the black girl first and the group of two whites place her last, he'll immediately see the inherent bias and correct for it in the manner he feels is right. He may correct for it wrong by taking an equal weighted average but maybe he is smart enough to determine that blacks only represent 15% of the total pop so maybe you place the black girl second from the last instead of last rather than in the middle etc... This can all be processes by a human who is seeing what's going on. A secret ballot is going to have the inherent bias of the fact you only have a 5 person sample size which might not be a proper reflection of the total pop etc...

So many reasons but the crux of it is that people aren't equal so weighting everyone's vote as equal doesn't necessarily constitute as good of an outcome as you would from simply having your higher quality and more capable people choose. That's something a human in charge given the scenario I present might be more readily able to accomplish.