It is true that a lot of high profile individuals get the lions share of attention and don't rate back (at least not with their account and they probably don't have an incognito jam participant account), just look at Dani for example. They are also usually the ones to "win", since they make games for a living. But on the other hand you have the whole least rated page where there is currently a wall of 2 ratings per game.
I do see a problem with your suggestion to give the people a random allocation of games to play. This system is sort of already implemented and and kicks of the rating period. It's the random filter. Unfortunately it then devolves into the r4r system when reviews for your game start flying in. We are subconsciously inclined to return the favor. You can't change that.
It would create a lot of problems if we were to "lock" the games and say: "here dear jammer are 20 games you need to play and rate them in 14 days".
Lets suppose RNGesus gave you the following:
- 10 garbage games that weren't compiled properly or are outright just some random source code text files (I rated one such game) or simply a "sorry couldn't finish"
- 5 games that look fine but have only been compiled for mac and you're too poor to have one in your household and have no idea how to set up a virtual machine (since you only started doing fancy stuff)
- 4 decent games with no problems
- 1 good game by a pro
More then half of what you got (and such a spread could occur given enough people) you can't even play. Guess it's overtime for the mods that will have to assign you new random games that are hopefully playable.
But what if you don't have time? Ok 20 games is doable on a weekend, but you can't expect that everyone is going to do 20 ratings, should this disqualify them and who will replace the missing ratings?
Lastly, what if you want to play your friends game. Will you have to wait until the jam is over, or will you just be forbidden to rate them?
Or what if you played a game and it was just ok. The most generic game. There is nothing bad to say, but also not a lot to praise. Will you be forced to write a comment?
Honestly the current system works ok, but dose require honesty and the willingness of people to play random games. It is important that we have enough quality raters, that play as many games as possible, but you also need moderators that keep an eye out for troublemakers. I think TheDutchMagikarp removed a bunch of unplayable games the other day for example, so it's definitely not the wild west out here.