I apologise for describing licenses which don’t allow a transfer to GBIF as “wrong”, “incorrect” or “bad”. As I said, everyone has the right to choose the license he/she wants, but without a doubt it is better to choose a more open license.
Scientists are of course aware of iNaturalist and are using it a lot. However, unless I am not making a study about citizen science or iNaturalist, the first choice for most scientists is GBIF, as I have observations from all kind of sources there. And as cthawley mentioned, the DOI is important to use the data set in a paper.
Pisum, the list you mentioned (https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/published-papers-that-use-inaturalist-data-wiki-3-2022-and-2023/34753) is a list of publications that are NOT getting the data via GBIF or citing GBIF. When you go to GBIF you can see that the iNaturalist data set from GBIF is used in almost 5,000 publications: https://www.gbif.org/dataset/50c9509d-22c7-4a22-a47d-8c48425ef4a7/activity