[kqr]

This is why I dislike the popularity contests we call "democracy" today. If you so much as hint at the complexity of questions, if you happen to admit that something is a trade-off, or that there are risks with a policy, you're out of the system in seconds.

Not that I have a better suggestion, mind you. Maybe sortition with an advisory panel of experts? But how would the experts be chosen?

It would be easy to draw from the top ranks of some guild system -- but probably also highly inequitable, as guilds tend to restrict the profession to their likes.