BGP decision algorithm nitty-gritty (relationship of locally originated routes to weight attribute)

Question

Hello everyone, i have a question on this algorithm. Specifically the relationship between (cisco specific) WEIGHT which is right at the top of the path selection algorithm.... and routes that are ORIGINATED_LOCALLY (3rd one down, after weight and local_pref). 
Heres the relevant steps of the decision tree: 
   1/WEIGHT (highest wins)
   2/LOCAL_PREF (highest wins) 
   3/ORIGINATED LOCALLY (prefer locally originated over peer learnt) 
Whats confusing to me is that Jeff's book tells us that if a prefix is ORIGINATED_LOCALLY (ie entered into BGP on that same router - either by a network/aggregate-address statement, or from redistribution) then its WEIGHT will also be set to 32768 (as opposed to a BGP peer learnt route whose WEIGHT is set to 0). I understand this. 
My question is why??? Seems to me that if this is the case there is little purpose of having ORIGINATED_LOCALLY in the decision tree at all, as the logic will never get there on account of the the propagation of its value into (the higher up) WEIGHT decision. This also in turn means that ORIGINATED_LOCALLY has the power to override the attribute LOCAL_PREF.... so couldn't this whole logic be simplified to be: 
   1/WEIGHT or ORIGINATED LOCALLY
   2/LOCAL_PREF (highest wins) 
This very thing has confused another user on another post too, that user writes:  "I tried thinking of an example where "ORIGINATED LOCALLY" works but weight doesn't, but couldn't think of any."
looking forward to the thoughts of this community.
Thanks in advance, Keiran. 
PS> perhaps the attached diagram will help visualise this. 

Answer 1

Thanks for your reply shaikhkamran123, i hadn't considered the multivendor environment (where cisco specific concept of 'weight' would be irrelevant to those routers), so yes their decision would start with: 
1) Local Preference
2) Locally originated
as opposed to cisco
   1/WEIGHT (highest wins)
   2/LOCAL_PREF (highest wins) 
   3/ORIGINATED LOCALLY (prefer locally originated over peer learnt) 
but it still doesn't really explain why cisco chose to alter their inbuilt weight based on if a route was locally originated. This alters the logic of the above decision algorithm: ie if its locally originated, it will set a high weight (32768), which will be preferred.... and heres the main thing *BEFORE* local_pref is even looked at.  So in other words decision criteria#3, gets merged into #1, skipping ahead of #2.  Am i going crazy here?? 
thanks in advance all... 
K.