streetfighter, for someone professing to be on the high road you sure are taking a lot of low blows. You've been nothing short of mean and nasty to anyone who dares question you whether about your sales tactics or the fact that you're mean and nasty.
The former, by the way, is textbook spam. It's not necessary that it be automated or repetitive -- it just has to be unsolicited and indiscriminate.
I'm mean and nasty to anyone who is mean and nasty to me.
Excellent idea! Let's recap. Here are my first 3 posts that had anything at all to do with you (the 3rd was a response to RoseQueen but dealt with your post):
Yeah, real mean and nasty stuff there!
And your response (#38):
He later went on to discuss metal bars in one poster's rectum, sleeping with another poster's mother, and two posters sleeping with one another. And that's the fellow who keeps repeating that it's me who has been offensive, obnoxious, and rude in this thread.
threats and aggression (is that it?)
Oh yeah, that was it-- I'm really worried now about some knuckle-dragging skinhead traveling several thousand miles to thump me because I've pointed out he's a spammer. 
Is chess conceptually flawed?
Sometimes I think so. But that kind of thinking is whimsical.
The game is not flawed, you see, it's the crackpots who play it.
Just because I was rude and offensive, used profanity and vulgarity, threats and aggression (is that it?) doesn't mean that you are NOT rude and obnoxious, failure.
Of course it doesn't. The fact that he wasn't rude and obnoxious is the reason why people think he wasn't. If the whole world is against you, chances are very low that everyone but you has gone crazy.
What is indiscriminate about my first post? If you are going to have a go at me, get your facts right. I've explained several times why I posted - but don't let the truth get in the way of a dig at me Grobe! By the way, most posts here are 'unsolicited', and far more annoying than 'spam'.
There was a question about the history of chess, followed by some good natured ribbing about blowhards.
I'd be hard pressed to defend insertion of an ad for a chess attack manual for club players as anything but indiscriminate.
That said, if you had the site's blessing to put it there, godspeed.
For someone who was so exact about the site's T&C's, you seem to have missed out a lot there Mr Blunderful!
Posts 2, 4, 6, (7) and 8. Also 21 and 24 (mine was #27) are all related in some way to the original question -- the rest was the silliness. If you're not able or willing to acknowledge that, then there's not much else I can do or say!
Please, if it offends you so much to see a chess-writer plug his book while at the same time trying to contribute to a thread, report me to chess.com. Please do so, because I'm utterly fed-up with this.
Deep breaths. They're your friend.
You asked, I believed with genuine sincerity, how your post could be taken as indiscriminate. I answered that it was because it failed to address the meat of the initial query AND because it failed to contribute to the flow of the coversation.
It's okay. Forum marketing is tough for the uninitiated. I get that. But I also dropped a bunch of little nuggets in there that would help you get pointed in the right direction, marketing persona-wise, if your defense mechanisms weren't set to annihilate.
You're selling. It's a personality and relationships game.
You could question my viewpoint without questioning my "ability" to reason, especially since I'm objectively correct in this instance.
If the major support you're receiving in the thread is coming from a known troll account, you've got to reconsider the way you're coming off.
I give you the benny of the doubt. I assume you're a decent enough guy who probably knows the game of chess and just has his hackles raised for whatever reason. Get them down. You'll get killed in the sales game if you can't cope with gibbering fools like me and Cystem and Grobe. You're talking there about people who have fun here, and enjoy this place, and who get frustrated by any influx of people whose sole purpose is seemingly to be a jack *** (in our friend RoseQueen's instance) or whose sole purpose is seemingly to spam us.
But WE'RE your target audience. Don't lob firebombs at us, unless you intend to do it good-naturedly, like TD. Understand us, joke with us, and when we call you out, go, "aw piss, my bad." Till your link dropping becomes seamlessly integrated with your outgoing personality and your role in the community, you'll never be seen as anything but a spammer. But once that happens, people will line up to buy your crappy book. ;)
And again, for the love of god, add an email capture thing to your sales page, or you're just pissing in the wind.
Just the inane ramblings of a guy who made his fortune selling shit online. YMMV.
Well said.
Even more succinctly:
Is chess conceptually flawed?
Sometimes I think so. But that kind of thinking is whimsical.
The game is not flawed, you see, it's the crackpots who play it.
Who let this spammer in?
Put a cork in it, Corky.
re: Prawn's pic above--
Whenever I wake up in a situation like that I can never remember how I got there.
Please exclude me as well. I find you rude and obnoxious and really don't want your product that badly.
I think this whole thing is a simple internet misunderstanding and too much testosterone, all around (especially that corky/dorky).
I just looked at the excerpt of Andrew's book http://www.streetfightingchess.com/Streetfighting%20Chess%20Ch%201.pdf
and it looks interesting.
Only thing, Andrew...good killer instincts aside, next time you may want to get someone other than yourself to do the promotion...yah?
Please exclude me as well. I find you rude and obnoxious and really don't want your product that badly.
You were already excluded. Didn't anyone tell you? I exclude people indiscriminately - you of all people should know what that word means .
lol
Thread is golden.
If you exclude people indiscriminately are you actually excluding them?
I mean, isn't non-discrimination inclusive by definition?
Perhaps he thinks discriminately and indiscriminately mean the same thing, like flammable and inflammable.
So you apologize certain individuals (not yourself) degenerated the thread, and further imply that those you insulted deserved it.
That "apology" made me lol just so you know 
I think I'll stop tracking this thread now - I fear it might spiral downwards again as soon as certain individuals come back online.
I've been here all along, but good riddance to you anyway.
ROFLMAO!!!
loser
This one is more an ends of the horse type situation. Spammer is the back end.