This is an interesting concept I haven't really thought down much.

The way the referee system works is that it takes downvote input from the 9 @referee# accounts and then downvotes a post after it's 4 days old until its payout date (upvotes stop counting after 4 days) if 4 @referees all agree. The way it determines downvote application is based on what the referees each vote their % to be. If they all vote 100% then it will take 100% of the reward from a post but if they vote an average of 65% then @referee will only try to remove 65% of the rewards. No referees hold any SPORTS so no single voice is the voice of the moderation team.

With users trailing a @referee# who's voice they trust they could effectively outsource their downvoting to someone who's habits they trust. In the end it's still not @referee# with power only that another user has decided to follow their role. This would also assist @referee as it would have to use a lower amount of downvote power to remove rewards if a post met consensus as the trail would presumably vote before @referee checked consensus to vote. I think I like it @blanchy.sports!