in the same vein

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Dont-neglect-to-pay-Harlan-Ellison

Don't neglect to pay Harlan Ellison has been added as a related post - related requested by ChaosEngine.

*promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Tuesday, November 10th, 2015 6:46pm PST - promote requested by enoch.

Obviously different industry, but I have to occasionally do "art tests" in my field when I'm starting work for a new client or studio. These usually involve about a weekend-ish worth of unpaid work to produce a sample of art that's in the style and level of quality they need.
Architects have similar hoops, where they scramble, unpaid, to beat out competition for the lowest bid of work, so that scenario doesn't exactly belong here. I watched the whole thing because it was mildly interesting to see what the point was, but I didn't get anything out of it when it was over. (Other than "wtf is zulu alpha kilo?")

Monetization of art, which is what they're talking about, isn't a commodity or a service. Seems disingenuous to equate these different things. When you get breakfast, or do a workout, or have an architect design your concept, there's an underlying understanding of what's being offered. At the other end of this, you can pay a designer for something, say a website, and end up with complete dreck and you've lost your money.

Although they get close with the architect, it's still not the same.

Besides, spec only exists because people agree to it.

We should only allow videos on Videosift if people like them. If someone puts in the time to sift a video and no one likes it, it doesn't get sifted. I think it could work with votes on digital content.

It'd never work.