There seems to be much focus on the people using the bots, rather than the people running them. They are the ones making money of its use, so they are in the end the ones responsible for the utter lack of quality checks. They make enough from their huge milk-cow bots, so why can't they at least put in some minimal amount of work into assuring some minimum level of quality ?  Maybe the best thing to do with our excess voting power would to only use vote bots of bot owners known to moderate, and possibly to actually downvote random "unmoderated" vote-bot upvoted content , in order to prompt those bot owners to start doing some bare minimum moderation for their bots as well. 

Look at it like spam mail and open relays. A vote bot without any moderation is like an open relay to spam. Given the marginal ROI for users, it only takes marginal downvotes to make the ROI negative for users of unmoderated bots. 

So rather than "rewarding" the bot owners for being lazy by using their unmoderated services, use the money to rent SP and downvote random  unmoderated vote bot upvoted content with it, if you want to help the platform. Oh, and to upvote content upvoted by "moderated" upvote bots.  If we can help making the ROI on moderated bot usage slightly positive while making the ROI on unmoderated, open relay spam type bots slightly negative, our SBD would truly make a difference.