He discussed it with the owner, and was given permission to post.  Commercial yes, but he is contributing something at least.

I won't disagree with you on this.  If it was my site, and it's not, I probably would not have given approval for these type of posts.

Yeah, thanks for that insult.  That helps.

I'm obviously too stupid to understand the topic and too lazy to learn about it.

Dormouse, Quarken wasn't insulting you. He was just making the general point that the economics section is of low traffic due to people not being interested in economics rather than marotta's posts. I agree with him on this 

I read all of Marotta's articles in the link he posts. They are very light on information but they are interesting and are definately not hard sell or offensive. The only offensive thing about Marotta is his hair style  Only j/k

The reason that Marotta's posts seem so frequent is that not many posters open new threads in this section. If he posted them in the US section(where there is heaps of traffic) they would drop down to the bottom in no time, and no one would notice them. Posting them in a low traffic section like the economics section is what gives the impression he is mass spamming.

Most economic topics get posted in the US forum here. I can understand why people would do this, as it ensures maximum readership form their posting effort.

Anyway, its all good 

I take nothing personally.

However, I do take people's words for what they say, not what one might think they are implying by giving them the benefit of the doubt.  I give no one the benefit of the doubt.

I do like economics discussions, I do like to start economics threads, I do find the topic interesting, I have studied the topic and I'm the one who is posting here talking about not posting here.

And the comment was clearly directed as an argument about why people don't post on economics threads.  Ergo, since I was talking about that precise topic, it applies to me.  That may not have been the intention of the poster (I don't really care if it was or not), that is the outcome of that poster's words.

Anyway, I'm not sure which is more weird - the vague insult against any who might want to discuss economics (but won't because of commercial spam), or the 'full-court' press from all the site admins here to defend that view.  Seems odd.  (and no, I'm not asking for more admins to argue the point - the point is quite uninteresting).

Fortaleza is right.  I'm the only admin that posted here, and I pretty much agreed with you. Your perceptions of events are, shall we say, unique.   Wiggy is a moderator, and all he said was he didn't think it was an insult.  And while I would never try to chase posters away, I am probably the last one to coddle them.  I simply thought you desreved an answer as to the why's.  Now I am sorry I posted.

Thank you.  I wasn't referring to anyone specifically.  Sorry if you thought otherwise, Dormouse.