> Self-published doesn't have to mean self-everything.
I think this is the crux of the discussion - people like Nathan Barry are advocating that you do not put your book on Amazon. I think that may work for a few authors, but if everyone did it, it would fall apart.
I think authors moving to self-publishing is a good thing. And when the author sells directly to the reader (and not on Amazon), he/she can build relationships directly with the reader, and can earn more money. That's a good thing.
The problems are:
1. Discoverability - finding good books that have been self-published by authors.
2. Reviews - even on goodreads.com not all books are reviewed, and there is no way to find books in the startup space. Having a community of people who can recommend good books on a topic could be valuable.
3. Interaction - personally, I find interacting with other people that are reading the same book motivating. Hearing their point of view, and their ideas for applying a book's topic can improve the reading experience.
The problem, as you called out, is with the self-selling, it's a very different skillset than the one that produced the book, so it makes sense to let an Amazon help out on that front.
My sales have certainly not been spectacular[1], but just by dropping my book on Amazon I have 15 reviews[2] I wouldn't otherwise have, and far more revenue overall.
[1] http://www.syncingdreams.com/2013/02/rise-and-fall-of-book-o... [2] http://www.amazon.com/Dragon-Master-Stonedragon-Flame-1-eboo...
In any case, none of this is due to self-publishing, but rather a particular approach to self-publishing which does not seem to be all that common.
You have trouble reading ebooks and, I presume, prefer paper? Self-publishing is entirely compatible with offering a paper version of the book.
Books that aren't listed on places like Amazon are troublesome? Good thing it's really easy to get a self-published book on Amazon.
Self-published doesn't have to mean self-everything.