Perischoinisma does not rely on any complex geolocation algorithm.
Perischoinisma relies on the strict concurrent meetings that occur into a town, and on the unanimous testimony of all the attendies that nobody enters inside the fenced area when the procedure already started, and nobody leaves the fenced area until the procedure ends. Several fenced areas could be allocated in specific points into a town. Besides the unanimous testimony, it is said that the rope was also covered with fresh paint, so whoever tried to enter or leave the perischoinisma area was marked, and thus was not accepted to another nearby area.
Perischoinisma could be translated as “rope’s periphery” from peri(phery) and schoini(σχοινί)=rope. Perischoinisma has already been succesfully implemented in ancient Athenian direct democracy. Ruins of a perischoinisma area is preserved until nowdays, so have a look at it as an alternative/supplementary option for the encointer community.
Google translate from the spanish text.
With this scant information, not much could be expected from the archaeological remains. In the 70s, to the north of the agora, a series of holes were discovered in the ground, arranged in order; it was thought that they could have served as a light barrier that formed the entrance to the agora. The stratigraphy allowed establishing the dating in the first half of the century V BC A line of five bases, more or less square, of limestone also appeared. 47 cm on each side and 38 cm deep, separated from each other by a space of 1.85 m. A smaller hole could be seen in the center into which they could have been inserted. wooden poles to support a light structure. These bases, which date from around the year 450, were initially interpreted as elements of the starting line of a racetrack, an aphesis such as those of Priene, Corinthos or Epidaurus (Valavanis, 1999).
Connecting it with the 10 tribes, ten spaces were restored. An Italian archaeologist, Enzo Lippolis, in the year 2000, sensed that it could be part of perischoinisma and raised the hypothesis of the existence of a zone to the north of the agora destined to the operations of vote in the fifth century. Excavations carried out between 2011 and 2013 have uncovered other bases of the same category, this time delimiting a rectangle of 12 m x 15 m. HE can now more precisely date this device, which would date back to the years 475-450 and that it probably stopped being used around 430-420 (Agora reports 2012 & 2013). E. Lipollis reiterates in a recent study (Lipollis, in press) his hypothesis favorable to identification of perischoinisma, although I don’t think it can be said with total certainty.
The 180 m2 space is too small to accommodate all the magistrates who directed the
ostracism operations, the archons and according to Filocoro, the Council, which would be rather the pritans, who would already be quite numerous; and this taking for granted that they did not fit into the once the 6,000 citizens of the quorum to validate the process. You should also store the containers to deposit the ostraka. It could be a place of transition that does not correspond, however, to the imperatives of the organization of the civic body in ten tribes, since only 9 entries can be restored among the 10 posts (López-Rabatel, in press-a)
Obviously 6000 persons do not fit to a 180 m2 rectangle. But what if many Perischoinisma existed, each one in every neighborhood, and the procedure was concurrent? In that case it makes sense, the perischoinisma method both scales and prevents for someone to participate in two or more meetings. (and this is an hypothesis, an extended hypothesis of E. Lippolis’s one, that more perischoinisma ruins could be discovered).