This is a (relatively) good summary of the situation. I think you exaggerate on point #1, but it doesn't really matter, so let's not quibble.
Your question is interesting though: if you have genuinely good content (or functionality), do you market it as aggressively as possible, knowing that if you don't, less useful stuff by superior marketers is going to win out? Doesn't game theory indicate that you should, if you want to positively impact as many as possible?
I think it goes deeper than that - it deeply influences the market you choose to serve in the first place.
If you can semi-credibly promise to give people instant results in wealth, physique, sex, etc - your offer will sell.
The real question isn't whether or not you choose to market your offer aggressively. It's whether or not you choose to enter those specific (proven) markets, using that specific (proven) approach, knowing full well that you're intentionally exaggerating for the sake of attention and results.
Personally, I've intentionally made the decision not to go that route. It makes my job more difficult, but it's a tradeoff I'm willing to make.
As someone who once dabbled in coaching, allow me to say that I always noticed you as an example of a person doing it in a way that I found honorable and admirable. The integrity you mention here is certainly a large part of why.
Your question is interesting though: if you have genuinely good content (or functionality), do you market it as aggressively as possible, knowing that if you don't, less useful stuff by superior marketers is going to win out? Doesn't game theory indicate that you should, if you want to positively impact as many as possible?