There is probably some merit to an argument that bot voting will allow the overall voting mechanism to degrade to some degree immediately. Indeed, there is probably merit to an argument that there may be some inherent degradation even some time after an initial recovery (as anticipated after a seemingly endless experience of app "improvements" that leave me feeling nostalgic—and in fact, in many cases causing me to install legacy versions or alternate apps in favor of manual, yet more effective feature sets) . Certainly, some voting bots will end up voting very poorly (like mostly curating cat videos even though their creator wouldn't). However, I don't immediately see how one could evaluate those bot votes as inferior to manual human votes. In other words, there is probably some merit to an argument that voting (in any and all forms) will allow the overall mechanism to degrade from time to time. So, maybe the presupposition that a bot vote is necessarily degrading while a human vote is necessarily maintaining integrity and high quality may be flawed to begin with?
As far as supervision, and the idea that bot votes without a human confirming votes (let alone reviewing a queue and manually voting) or without a human even consuming the media after a bot vote:
I don't see an inherent issue. Suppose I like any and all posts about buttered toast. I like pictures of it, songs about it, descriptions of what it tastes like, and scientific analysis of it. I like to upvote buttered toast deniers as well as the buttered toast promoted material, 'cause I'm just that into buttered toast and I really want other people to know about it. If left to my own devices, I'll miss most of what's out there about buttered toast, but if I create a bot to curate a buttery, toasty world of consumable media, buttered toast fans everywhere will benefit from my effort to build the butter-loving beast.
All that is to say, in summary, that perhaps many objections to this kind of evolution of platform interaction are purely knee-jerk reactions (and should be ignored purposefully for the lack of foundation they represent). Perhaps.
Of course, this is all anecdotal and speculative, but maybe it adds something of note to the conversation anyway.
Have fun. It'll be interesting to see how this goes for you.
[√] I am not a robot (I think).
That's an interesting point that I hadn't considered. A bot could easily do a daily post with its list of upvoted titles, authors, and links, then people with similar tastes could follow the bot. That's something that would be tedious for a human curator.