(Image above borrowed from the enginewitty post... because it is PERFECT)
Sometimes you read a post that echoes sentiments so closely, you want everyone to read and consider. 
Token exchange for curation still exist, they are not illegal, unethical or immoral.
They also shouldn't be SECRET, like it's some shameful back-ally thing. They should be transparent, open to constructive criticism, constantly improved, tweaked, and they should not be threatened.
With the sudden "bidbot" scare, it's important for the HIVE community to see both sides of the coin. Rather than just assuming a consensus opinion, there is some important CONTEXT to view and understand. And I think Witty explained it pretty well.
Witty asked a very important question to some high powered whales, who are suddenly very concerned with the return of (what are being called) "bidbots". Witty asks:
Since you pay people to delegate to your curative efforts, even if they (votes) are done manually, you are still using other people's HP and paying them for it. The question then is, how is that any different from buying a vote?
A curator paying tokens for HP delegation to curate and profit from curation rewards, VS a content producer paying tokens for a curation and profiting from the author reward - how are these different? Both are "pay to play" schemes.
If anything, the AUTHOR puts forth his OWN creative energy for the author reward profit, while the CURATOR is using BORROWED HP for the curation reward profit.
I don't have a problem with either scenario, in fact both of these offer opportunities to INVEST in the HIVE economy, instead of putting it on the market to be SOLD.
Like Witty, I've also been on the blockchain about 8 years this May (my original account ironshield) and while originally criticizing the "bidbots" back then, after consideration I reversed my decision about them and gladly used them without remorse. The rewards were powered up and it allowed me to be weaned off of a modest delegation that was gifted to me early on and curate on my own steam (pun intended).
I owe a debt of gratitude to tools like these which kept me going through some challenging times.
For me the obviously wrong, cheating, bribery scheme of "bidbots", allowed me to get a footing on the early blockchain and I'm not sure I would still be here so many years later, if not for these utilities. Even using this alleged "cheat code", it still took me years of daily posting and curating to finally get to over 10K in stake. Hardly getting super rich!
And really, it wasn't the "bidbots" that built wealth into my previous account, but as Witty points out, they gave me EXPOSURE. I was able to build a genuine following and manual curations. Many wonderful comments and back and forth - all an essential part of the HIVE experience.
I thought the bidbots were a brilliant idea. It was a way for a "common" low stakeholder to get ahead, graduate to "minnow", without relying on the sole approval of big stake-holders. A way for my posts to be seen by people who would not otherwise, opening up all sorts of new and exciting conversations.
When the "bidbots" were targeted and eliminated, I was pretty disappointed. I didn't speak out at the time, for fear of downvotes. Witnessing the zeal to exterminate the bidbots, and discourage their use, was distressing. I learned quickly that if big stakeholders don't like something, they have the power to SQUASH it.
It's even a little bit difficult now to speak about it because I don't exactly know the ramifications.
It seemed like there was a CONSENSUS that my opinion was WRONG. It was even worse then that. Thinking that it wasn't wrong, was itself WRONG!
It was implied that every time I used a paid curation service, I was committing an ethical misdeed, a "frowned upon" practice, participating in bribery. Nobody wants these accusations. So I kept quiet.
However, looking back, it turns out that "consensus" was contrived - many low stakeholders (like myself) didn't speak out at that time out of fear. These "bidbots" were very popular and many people used them, but there were no campaigns (that I'm aware of) to preserve them. Instead, the early adopters powered down and quietly left. Never to return.
But I stuck around.
Thankfully, at that time I had enough of a following momentum to keep going on my own without the "bidbots". But for new bloggers, they were disadvantaged, relying exclusively on the favor of the big stake holders and curation trails for upvotes.
Fair enough, certainly nothing wrong with natural/manual upvotes, it's the LIFEBLOOD of the platform, but they could not enjoy the artificial boost that I enjoyed early on.
Sometimes users based their decision on whether this this platform was for them or not on their post performance. Everyone's time is valuable, there's only so many 3 hour posts earning $0.48 that a person can tolerate before giving up. But a nice SBI vote, or submitting the post for a "paid" curation, helped turn that 3 hours into a few dollars. Better than nothing. It was enough encouragement and exposure to maybe someday get a manual curation over $10.
How excited I remember being when I got my first post payout in double digits.
After my ironshield account was plundered earlier this year (keys somehow acquired and changed), I had to make a decision also - is this platform worth continuing to investing time and energy into?
What I decided is that even IF the PLATFORM isn't worth investing time into (which it is), the COMMUNITY is what really makes it worth continuing. The outpouring of support that I received on this new account was overwhelming. And yes, I did receive generous support from some big accounts (including OCD) and I am very grateful!
Being once a "dolphin", now I'm back to being a "minnow" again - and most of that is from the generosity of the community, otherwise I'd be a "NOTHING".
That support includes some big stakeholders who supported me in my time of need. I am very grateful for their support, rebuilding this account to still continue daily blogging and attention.
As part of that campaign to build something new, I went back to the same sort of utilities and tools that helped me back in the beginning. That includes tokens which are exchanged for upvotes.
Should I do it quietly, fearful that some big "influencers" might not approve?
So now here I am all over again. Again, I'm a "minnow" using The Obviously Wrong, Cheating, Bribery Scheme, that's Raiding the Reward Pool. And by speaking out I might be downvoted into oblivion.
For me, this is an opportunity to show some bravery. Last time I was in this position, I was afraid to speak up - but this time (inspired by the post by Witty) I want to speak out, giving my opinion freely on the blockchain.
I hope this post lends another perspective on the subject, that opinions can be formed from the personal experiences of others and not by assumptions like "it should be obvious".
I have no desire for a flag war, nor do I mean any disrespect towards those with differing opinions.
This is what the blockchain is supposed to be all about: not posting cat pictures, but having real discussions on the immutable blockchain that in theory will be preserved forever(ish).
Thank you
Peace!
