I agree that ego is involved for me in finding where animals are, getting myself into a position to get a shot, and then making that shot. I'm accountable for the success of my hunt, or lack thereof, in every aspect. That's a big deal for me, and I've failed vastly more often at getting game than I've succeeded. I increase my chances of success with effort.
Should the guy who sits in his idling truck at historic elk routes all day, and happens to get a shot at animals that somebody else pushed that way get the same bragging rights as another guy who scouts and finds the animals, hikes several miles to get to them when the season opens, gets into position, makes a good shot, does the work of hauling all the animal out?
It is all hunting, and the guy in the truck would argue that he is hunting smarter rather than harder, but the difference lies in leaving it to chance, or taking control of the task. I see it similarly with paid hunts and guides. I know that if there wasn't some small guarantee of success paid for in cash, guys wouldn't spend small fortunes hunting with guides, no matter the locale.
Isn't the point of guided hunting, except where it is mandated by law, largely to pay to have a greater chance of success? It certainly doesn't give the guys who do it all on their own the justification to be dicks about it, but it should give them more bragging rights, shouldn't it?
The complaint that guys hunting near where they live have some advantage that others don't doesn't mesh with the reality of life. We all choose to live somewhere. If you choose to live back east, and then complain about the cost of western elk hunts, or the unfair advantage that locals have, you must realize that you can move to and live where ever you choose. That holds for much hunting around the world.
