If the 4 people counting the ballots are chosen truly at random after the voting is done, and they count the votes independently from each other, and there is s

If the 4 people counting the ballots are chosen truly at random after the voting is done, and they count the votes independently from each other, and there is some punishment (even a mild one, like a moderate fine) for disagreeing with the majority count, why would a counter discard your votes ? they have 0 gaurantess that others would discard the same number of votes so why risk being the minority report and getting punished ? bonus points if there is a reward for agreeing with the majority. If the randomness gaurantees hold and everybody knows they hold, I have trouble imagining a better system. It has a blockchain-y feel to it, you have no reason to trust any single rando, but a bunch of random non-colluding people all acting consistently is a very strong indicator that they are actually telling the truth.