No. You may be borrowing this stance from graphic design, which has a (mistakenly) rigid position on "spec work", complete with a "no-spec!" movement that generates complaints in any forum where the notion of a design contest is introduced. Graphic designers feel victimized by "contests" that were actual thinly-veiled attempts to solicit actual uncompensated work. When thinking about no-spec, you should remember that other professions --- particularly law --- routinely do speculative work in the hopes of inking long-term deals with lucrative customers.

There are exploitative contests for software developers. For instance, when a platform vendor hosts a "come up with the best new application for our platform!" contest; whether the contest is rigged or not, all those developers are doing gratis work for the platform, sinking costs that the vendor hopes will result in salable IP bound to their platform.

This, on the other hand, is a video game. The game happens to be controlled in terms of software. The best strategies and solutions for the video game have no value to anyone. Nobody's platform is being built up by gratis work generated by unsuspecting developers. Instead, time that might have been spent playing Netrek or OpenTTD is being spent on a more interesting game.

One way to tell the difference between an exploitative game and "just a game" is whether the organizer of the game gets something more than "publicity" and "stats on the people who played" (both of which are natural outcomes of running any online game). For example, in the exploitative platform game I alluded to above, the organizers got a raft of new applications for their platform that they didn't have to pay for.

I haven't looked carefully at this game, but I sure have run other games --- https://microcorruption.com is one of them --- and I'm happy to discuss them with you as long as you want until you understand that nobody is being exploited by them.

I do understand where this no spec movement is coming from, but I have lots of problems with that.

First, it's like the big players (and the opinion leaders) are telling the small ones how to behave.

I'm reading a bit in a designer's forum, especially the parts about work and jobs, and the situation for "normal designers" is dismal. Everytime I've visited that forum I'm happy I'm working in tech. Really.

So most small firms and single person freelancers don't have a choice. They really don't.

Of course it's easy for EdenSpiekermann to reject such spec work. They are booked. Others aren't.

Second, speaking of Spiekermann, he's strictly on the no spec side. And his old company, FontShop, is as well.

If you're reading (German) discussions on the Fontblog, you'll learn that spec workj is disgusting and you're traitor to your fellow designers if you do that.

No exceptions! Spec work for a charity that cannot pay a dime anyway is the same. Never!

Well... unless Spiekermann is on the jury himself. Like for some design competition somehow affiliated with the United Nations. Then it's all okay, because, hey UN!

And this hypocrisy is pervasive.

I don't know why you're so down on this. It's a competitive game that looks fun, no one is forcing you to take part. The code created here isn't even useful for any other purpose! It's not some 99 designs contest for code, it's like the Stripe CTF challenges if anything.

Agreed, I don't believe they are taking advantage of you.

Hey pj, sorry you feel that way. I can assure that our intent here is not to get cheap labor, the code that people write won't be usable to use in any way by us or third parties, so as pdenya mentioned you should only enter the contest if you think it's fun!

The part about "let us help you find a job" sounds condescending, as if the industry wasn't begging for developers that can actually write code.

I would argue any developer that understands the Traveling Salesman Problem is turning down job opportunities left and right. Call me a skeptic but if you don't care about the code, then sounds like the ulterior motive is to screen/recruit young developers and get some publicity.

In any case, I'm glad you're concerned about my feelings. I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking the trend. The only type of contest I believe in is a contest for charity. Anyway, you knew the contest would be a risk when you came up with the idea, right?

http://www.quora.com/What-legal-issues-come-up-when-running-...

Ah, didn't mean to condescend to people, we've actually met with quite a few great developers who just aren't good at marketing themselves or who aren't aware of the opportunities in the field. People on HN might not fall into that category for sure, but we feel really good about matching good developers with great companies.

Screening is definitely a motive for us, but it's entirely opt in and we don't bother people who don't respond (or ask us to remove them entirely). We're developers and understand the issue with LinkedIn spam.

Contests are risky for sure, which is why we spoke with some friends/advisers/lawyers about it before launching. There is a critical difference between randomly won prizes and games of contest (legal term). After discussing it, we thought it was worth the risk.

One thing I believe is that artificial limitations sometimes bring the most out of us -- contests are unique in this sense, if well designed. You deal with problems you wouldn't deal with otherwise, and more than make you good at solving those specific problems, they entice your creativity and tact for principles.

Just noting that I'm thoroughly codecombat (just started), amazing work.

Sometimes contests are just harmless fun. This contest is about finding suitable people jobs, not harvesting work for free, as you imply.