Let me give you a small example. You know about etiquette right? In every country it's different. Are you manipulating people because you behave differently at Church/Synagogue/etc. and in a bar, or with your parents, or at a dinner table? Are you manipulating people by trying to learn their language and making sure you talk about what's important to THEM an not just whats important to you? I am sure that put this way, you think it's actually all good things. Yet, once we start going further and looking at it more mechanically, it starts to seem disgusting to you and to many people. Perhaps it has to do with the Uncanny Valley actually. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley
Here is the thing. You want people to not be systematic and strategic to a large extent when meeting other people, except where everyone in society is already being shamed into doing it. Why? I think it is because when someone becomes systematic and strategic, then any particular interaction seems like it's just a pawn in a larger scheme, doesn't mean as much to the one being strategic, and for the most part this is unfortunately true. On the other hand, greater mastery over a domain lets you make better moves, and over time gives you more connections and more experience so that you can actually HELP people in ways you couldn't before. An experienced salesman can sell your pretty good product that you couldn't sell yourself, and you can rely on him to do so, even though you might think his sales tactics are "scammy" at first blush. A person who knows a lot of people after many years is able to connect you to the right people even though they have such a large network that you can't possibly imagine they have close relationships with most of them, yet they help you and you appreciate it. Winston Churchill made sure to remember the name and interests of each person he spoke to at dinners. Is he being manipulative and strategic? Maybe. But people loved him.
I think the bottom line here is this: forget the "stigma" that society forces you to attach to actually putting thought and strategy into achieving things when it comes to meeting people, organizing things, etc. If you are producing a result that HELPS EVERYONE INVOLVED, then you are actually doing a good thing. The litmus test is, if you encountered someone who was a master at what you are trying to do, would you be HAPPY that they did this to you, or NOT happy?
I think most of it is about being aware of what the other person really needs and wants, and working to give it to them. For example when a nightclub promoter invites you (a guy) what he really would like is for you to bring a girl or two to the event, so more alcohol will be sold. If you don't, he may be glad you came but ultimately if you did, he would be way happier because you are helping him. You may say, "well, you USED the girls to get more points with the promoter". But you also USED the promoter to help the girls! They all get free drinks and a great time, and meet more people. And they also think you are a cool guy that they had a great time with that night. So everyone wants to see you again.
Look at the suggestion at the end of my post. Do you really consider it creepy that you take your friends' business cards, ask them who they are desperately looking to meet, and actually talk them up to people whenever you feel that you might make a good match? And then ask your friends to do the same once you have made some results for them? Is it weird that you have a group of guys who remember to meet girls for their friends and invite them all to a big house party so they can introduce their friends and generally hang out and have a good time? Is "every man for himself" the only non fake strategy? Or is it actually MORE fake? The guy has to generate all the social proof out of thin air, and at the end of the day, the first strategy attracts people far more, because a group of cool people who respect each other is more attractive. Why not be part of one.