I really appreciate this topic and window for discussion. Aside from well-intended services such as minnowbooster for new users scraping on the bottom (introduced by a very helpful and supportive @reggaemuffin on the team to feel it's for a good cause), the concept of vote buying more than that really pisses me off. I think it's important to separate this into two parts: 1) Using bots (selectively vs in mass), and 2) bribing for or offering personal upvotes for a price.
Sending individuals SBD for their upvote is not an option for me, regardless of any level of success or failure I have on Steemit. While this platform often feels like a pyramid to claw up, it still feels like buying or selling votes in that fashion is cheating the system. The same goes for legacy arrangements for swapping huge upvotes.
While buying is your question, the same concept can be flipped to those who choose to sell their votes. People with valuable voting power that engage in this (scenario 2 above) are being greedy, and the blockchain can't hide it. I believe that it's a function of ethics, but perhaps I'm too biased or strict. If people don't sell, there's nothing to buy. It starts at the top.
I think that people should let the community reward naturally for effort and value. Quality work and proactive engagement will eventually snowball into a loyal following in theory. Maybe it won't with all of this said spam and static. But, turning to shortcuts means you're not willing to do the work and probably won't have what it takes. It's not easy getting virtually nothing for my posts unless I reluctantly use minnowbooster to salvage some pride and get my voters some type of return. I've only done this a few times because I mainly want my effort to be seen and appreciated, and it doesn't necessary have to be in monetary form. Receiving comments and discussion is more valuable to me than $10.
Regardless, if I'm going to succeed on this site, it's going to be organically via good content, intentions and networking by my own means. I won't sell/buy out.
What's the root of the problem? I think it's the supply and demand of meaningful upvotes for non-whales!! I think that part of this buy/sell "marketplace" is being generated from a large portion of powerful Steemit users staying connected with each other via voting rings and favors, regardless of how poor the content is. Do people really need the largest ROI on their curation that badly when their account is loaded? No. It feels like politics. I've seen the most absurd posts yield hundreds and am shocked that the whales could even vote for it, i.e., what makes it appear like there's more to the story. This isn't a conspiracy theory, I see it every day, and it's transparent via steemd or steemnow. If those users were actively curating and rewarding newer users, the demand for buying and selling votes would not be as strong.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.