I would second this. I would encourage you to use that list as not the end all but rather a quality recommendation guide. If you find that select referees aren't adhering to guidelines then it will be worthwhile for you to be able to voice those concerns.

This will become even more important when elected referees become a possibility as the software is written. We will need community watchers who will be able to identify if there's ever incidents where referees are not acting in the good faith of the community.

I would also argue that working within that list would make you a more electable referee if you were to ever want to run for the position. It would showcase that you can use an editorial eye towards your peers and provide the context that only your personal perspective can provide.

Regardless I thank you for supporting the community and look forward to fighting abuse along side you! :)