Well, we could assign the reviewers more “significance” here. We could give them points and if they “upvote” a paper it gives the paper a bit more visibility/reputation. If the reviewer has actually reviewed the paper it gives the paper more points.

How much a reviewer is able to “spend” could be based on the reputation of the institution, their own papers in the same field and the points they get for their reviews by other users.

Just a raw idea,but it seems possible, indeed.