I've been critical of these upvote bots for some time, and it's good to read the assessment of someone like @fubar-bdhr, who is working on fighting abuse for many hours each day and sees the patterns.

I consider these upvote bots, the pay-for-vote ones as well as the vote-for-free ones like MSP, as an invitation for abuse, and have witnessed them being used abusively several times.

These upvote bots may not only be bad for steemit as a whole, but sometimes also for those using them, at least for those producing good content. If used early, they discourage upvotes by real users as they make posts overvalued and destroy possible curation rewards. So there are cases where users don't get upvotes precisely because they are using these bots. I think for many of them it would better to produce quality content and wait until they get discovered, because that's what curators are looking for: undervalued quality content.

As I see it, the ones who profit the most (apart from the bot operators) are on the one hand abusers, and on the other hand creators of low-quality content who don't get upvotes for a reason.

I consider it the responsibility of the bot operators to find ways to curb the abuse, and not of the people from steemcleaners who already do a lot for the community.

Further, there is not only the responsibility to curb abuse, but also to make sure that the overall activity of these bots is beneficial for the community as a whole.

And there is something that can be done apart from not upvoting and downvoting: not voting for witnesses who operate bots that might be harmful. I make it a personal policy not to vote for such witnesses, including those involved in the heavily promoted minnowsupport project (MSP), before I see some evidence that the overall effect of these bots is positive.