If colin leslie dean debating his book is SPAM then so is JK Rowling' debating her new book SPAM

Readers of the debate, my opponent has failed to make a valid case in his opening round, for not only did he make an oversimplification fallacy but also misread and misinterpreted the dictionary definition provided in this debate.WHO IS Colin Leslie Dean?A quick google search shows us next to nothing on the actual character. For all we know he might just as well be a random person on the street. We find next to no “official” statements from the actual author, find no actual publishers that do acknowledge his existence and truth to be told I had never heard of him before actually arriving to DDO. What we can know about Dean is that he seems to have an awful lot of fans who strikingly all have the exact same grammar, need to advertise his unknown work and use the exact same vocabulary as each other with every single one portraying the same sense of logic and stubbornness over a period of several years. The similarities aren't so surprising, considering that in every single case the community that has been the target of said advertising scheme has always managed to identify the vessel as Dean himself. So, we see that in numerous websites Dean has been trying, unsuccessfully, to further his own agenda and his own work. Instead of resorting to honest advertising and actually placing effort into creating a good name for himself he is actively diminishing his own reputation and own credibility by trying to hide behind a mask and promoting his work on irrelevant forums, often resulting in annoyance and ridicule. Why would J.K Rowling be better fit for self promotion?Rowling, unlike Dean, is already a famous author that has a large fan base and a global recognition as a quality writer. There are a few places in the western world where her name isn't known and even fewer places where she is disliked. If Rowling where to come to DDO for some unkown reason she wouldn't have to use a fake name, she wouldn't need to address herself falsely as “leading author” and she could actually get into a detailed and mature discussion about the numerous things in the HP world for instance, for it is a rich world that many already know and love. She wouldn't need to try and rally up a discussion about something nobody but her is familiar with and she wouldn't have to post a link to an ill formatted webpage demonstrating the topic so she could actually have the discussion. In short, she already has such fame and quality that self promotion isn't needed, from that point it would simply be discussion. It would maybe be weird, but the opportunity to discuss something as famed as the HP franchise with the author would be an opportunity few would complain about. Dean however, being unknown and is not generally recalled as a quality writer, cannot have a vivid discussion about his work for nobody knows it. Yet after being told countless times that his poetry is not good[1] he still persists trying to promote it. The fact that he has lost over 22 debates, a majority of which where about Dean. This is equivalent to spam: irrelevant or unsolicited messages sent over the Internet, typically to large numbers of users, for the purposes of advertising.If you would have just done this once, it would have been fine. But after 20-something debates on the matter, along with a handful of Yahoo questions, topics on ilovephilosophy forum, biological websites and so on and so forth[2]. We can safely say that you're not going to reap any benefit from this. On the argument of “malware”, my opponent failed to read the definition, for it clearly is listing things that are commonly associated with spam. Advertising, phishing and malware are examples of spam, but spam isn't all these things as once, so my opponents comments on that matter are irrelevant.When defending Dean you have often been incredibly obnoxious, stubborn and refuse to actually listen to any reasonable logic. Not only have you compared Dean, an unknown poet, to Shakespeare, one of the greatest innovators and contributor of the English language[3], numerous times and recalled the latter as inferior to Dean often with almost comical efforts and results, but you never seem to truly get what those who criticise you are really saying nor how the English language works at times. I quote the first citation:“that is just poor logicbeing a horrible terrible poet does not mean he still cant be Australia's leading erotic poet”Here you condemn your opponents “horrible logic” and then strike back with a sentence so absurdly incorrect, non sensible and filled with all sorts of logical fallacies that I wasn't sure how to react to it. For one you are conceding to the fact that he is a horrible poet. The second part is somehow the conclusion that a horrible poet can still somehow be a leading poet. That's as sensible as saying that a plate full of tapeworms can still be considered a 5 star cuisine. If he is a leading poet he needs to lead, or if we take the definition: “To be the best/most important.” Unless he is the only poet in Australia he isn't leading. Someone who has next to no recognition and is generally recalled as a bad poet by those that have read his poetry is not leading anything. We are much closer to saying that J.K Rowling is a leading children book author in the U.K because she is one of the more respected, known and well received author of children novels in the U.K. To conclude:Dean isn't a well published author. That makes all the difference. He may well be the most mind boggling pioneer of a poet in his own mind, but to the general public he just comes off as someone trying way to hard. His poems are not well received, people generally are only annoyed by his constant self-promotion for we know that we won't receive any quality if we do end up clicking on the link as opposed to Rowling who would give us what she promisied in terms of quality writing. A quick look over the bibliography of Dean shows us that not a single book he has ever published has ever gotten a good array of reviews, most are ignored completely[4]. Looking over the bibliography of Rowling gives us a large collection of books that are getting a large majority of great reviews and a large people agreeing that it should be highly rated. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the key aspect that must be considered when it comes to this debate. Rowling is a quality author. Dean is not.I rest my case.1-http://www.debate.org...2-https://www.google.is...3-http://www.debate.org...4-https://www.google.is...5-https://www.google.is...