I think it is important to remember that not all bid bots/vote sellers are created equal. While I think you can make a case for why any pay-for-vote is a degradation of the platform, I think there is also room for a reasoned response that there IS an ethical way to use them. You mentioned @qustodian in another comment, which is the only bot I use right now. Being exclusive to @qurator members, it has a pretty rigorous white-listing process. I have a lot of confidence in the @qurator folks to use the earnings responsibly to actually give back to the platform. I've also heard good things about @jerrybanfield's bot because he takes the profits to fund worthy STEEM projects.
Personally, I will not use a bot unless I feel like my post has real value to people outside of my current following (I know that's subjective, but it helps guide me). It seems you have also developed a reasoned and rational strategy for staying ethical. Cheers.
I'm not against bots at all... Although most of the bid bots aren't profitable. It's the way some people use them that grinds my gears. Because if you do it several days after you post, you'll be giving the curation rewards to those who really read, comment and enjoy your blog just like you're doing now :)
But using the bots right after you post is basically "not caring" about those who follow you. You'll be raping the curation rewards and having them all for yourself. Even using the bots after 30min is basically giving your curation rewards to a non-human that doesn't even know how to read... I don't like that. But the platform is what it is, everyone is free to do whatever they want with it :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I appreciate your thoughtfulness with it. Thanks for starting the discussion. I honestly had not thought about it before, but will now adjust the timing when I do use a bot. Cheers.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit