Really? The article [1] you linked explains it very clearly. I am not sure what's hard to figure out.
I think you've misconstrued something here. They never said anything about creating an initial pool of tokens. All they did was to set the initial price. The pool was created by people buying them from the store and then listing them on the AH.
No one got their gold before their token was bought from the AH. And no one can buy a token unless there is a supply on the AH.
Firstly, I think you're really just playing with semantics regarding whether Blizzard control the price. Yes, of course they are the ones that ultimately decide what that price is, but the basis of that price is driven by player behaviour. In other words they don't arbitrarily set the price, they allow it to move according to market forces. The token price is an accurate reflection of player perceptions of the $$ value of gold and has nothing to do with what Blizzard thinks this value should/shouldn't be.
Secondly, I wouldn't classify them as a market maker, even if they do share some characteristics. A market maker facilitates trade by being a buffer between buyers and sellers who will either buy stock from sellers and hold on to it until a buyer wants it, or who will sell stock to a buyer even if no one is actually selling. Blizzard does neither of these things. When you sell a token on the AH you don't get paid immediately. You get paid once a buyer is found. And if there are no tokens available on the AH then as buyer you can't buy until stock becomes available.
There is zero evidence to support the notion that Blizzard does this.
Blizzard's algorithm attempts to balance two things:
1) That there are always enough tokens on the AH to meet demand
2) That tokens don't sit too long in the AH, thus ensuring that sellers get their gold in a reasonable amount of time
In simple terms, the token supply on the AH is like water in a drinking trough. Sellers are constantly adding water, buyers are constantly drinking the water. The only way to try and control the rates at which both those things happens is by changing the price. Increasing the price encourages the water to flow into the trough faster while simultaneously slowing the rate at which it is let out. Decreasing the price has the opposite effect, reducing the rate of inflow while increasing outflows.
If the algorithm fails reflect an accurate assessment of the value players attach to gold, then the trough would either overflow (meaning that sellers would have to wait increasingly long periods of time to sell their tokens) or run dry (meaning that players would not be able to buy tokens off the AH because they'd always be sold out.
In essence all that algorithm is doing is modifying the price up or down based on how full that trough is and rapidly (and in which direction) the level is changing. The algorithm tries to keep the trough essentially at a constant half full level.
In effect that price is set by player behaviour.
Well, yes, the token system as described by [1] is very decent. Which is why I have to question why you think the actual system works differently. Blizzard doesn't need to supply extra tokens if the AH runs dry. In fact the AH shouldn't ever run dry because it will react quickly enough to push the price up which will stabilise it.
In theory, yes, Blizzard could sell more tokens on the store than they list on the AH (eg for every three tokens bought from the shop they sell two to players for gold and then destroy the third and pay the seller the gold). But there is no evidence that this even might be the case, and no good reason for Blizzard to do it, and as you say "Just dumping in gold would be a disaster" not to mention a massive reputational risk if it ever came out.
Which is why I say that arguments that like to suggest that Blizzard are doing such sound a lot like conspiracy theories.
- - - Updated - - -
You're trying to argue that Blizzard are hypocrites but you're basing your argument on false equivalences and completely ignoring context.
Maybe stop to consider why Blizzard was against the selling of gold for real money. And no, it's not because they have any kind of fundamental problem with the idea of players exchanging gold for any reason whatsoever - whether it be for charity, for friendship, for the good of the guild, for sexual favours or *gasp* even for money.
What they do have a problem with is what certain unsavoury, scummy, unscrupulous people will do given the opportunities presented by the ability to exchange gold for money.
Blizzard are against gold sellers using bots to disrupt the economy (at the expense of honest players). Blizzard are against gold sellers hacking people's accounts and stealing their gold, disenchanting their gear and selling off the pet collections. Their only gripe with buying gold is when it encourages this sort of thing.
And if you actually stopped and thought about it for a few seconds, you'd see that Blizzard electing to provide a safe, reliable and harmless way to facilitate the trade of gold between honest players, then it should be really obvious that it's totally consistent with their stance against gold sellers.
Do Blizzard make some money off the token system? Yes they do. But was that really their main motive making the token system? I think you'd have to be pretty foolish to believe that. The token system is good for players, it's good for the game, and it's good for Blizzard.
- - - Updated - - -
Because
1) there is absolutely zero requirement to buy tokens in order to do so
2) buying gold through tokens isn't going to magically translate into game-winning gear