[cek]

I read the no-spec site and while I kinda see the POV when thinking about large design projects, I don't see what the problem is for small things like a banner ad as the Kickoff Labs post was discussing.

There are creatives all over the world eager to get paid a few hundred bucks for a bunch of small jobs. Sites like 99designs/crowdSPRING provide an efficient market for them.

I needed a logo for a super-lean startup idea. In a few days, spending $400, I got a kick-ass logo via one of these sites.

Customer happy. Provider happy.

What's the problem?

[tptacek]

The problem is that nobody gets a kick-ass logo from a well-known NYC designer for 10x what you paid.

[kranner]

The problem is that there were other almost-providers who worked for free, didn't get paid, and aren't happy.

[cek]

But those 'almost-providers' knew they might not get the deal. They choose to participate knowing there was a risk.

They didn't "work for free", they made a decision that the risk/reward was worth it.

Oh, and if you down-vote someone on HN for asking a question the least you can do is fess up and explain why.

[kranner]

OK, I "confess" that I downvoted your post because I considered the question disingenuous. The risk/reward may not always be clear to all participants, and in a fairer world such choices might not have existed in the first place.

My vote is really against encouraging people to view design contests as fair enough, not you personally.

[cek]

Kudos for 'fessing up.