I mean, what is this but pure raw ageism? So what if he's 16? How do you know he didn't contribute anything because of that? That's a bit of a leap. Especially since they kept him around for a few years, must have been doing somethin' they liked or why have them there to begin with, if they're so useless and not contributing anything? Why even have them around to begin with, for any amount of time at all? The whole premise is obviously false from the get-go, because no company would ever go for that. They're clearly getting something out of it, from the very beginning... they're just not giving back in return.
Which is nonsense, as experience does not pay the bills. You want someone's work, pay them for it. End of. Or is this a minimum wage argument where 16 year-olds don't have any bills they need to worry about, so it's fine and even ignoring the obvious ageism there that these things called university and saving up for one's first flat or whatever just magically disappear into nowhere.
Not that it matters anyway because as we've learned since the OP they were apparently doing that to all kinds of people, so the age argument doesn't even work anyway in this case. They were basically trying to pay as few people as they could, regardless of age or skill level, regardless of what they did or didn't bring to the team, regardless of whether they used their work or not. Hell, as we've learned since, apparently even Toby Fox of Undertale fame did some music for them that at fist they didn't use because apparently he wasn't active in their IRC channel enough and so it was supposedly scrapped... until he hit it big with Undertale, where it was plopped back into the game all of a sudden. Sure didn't seem like they felt that was a worthless contribution anymore, very interesting how quickly these things can change...
But the point being, you want someone to do work for you. Pay. Them. Doesn't matter their age, doesn't matter this, doesn't matter that. If they're desirable enough for you to have around in the first place, if they're doing the same work as other people who would otherwise be paid, and putting in the same hard work and effort as anyone else, as fucking "exposure" or "experience" or whatever doesn't pay bills or put food on the table.
People put in the work. Pay them for it. None of this exposure nonsense. And I'm very aware, before it's brought up, this is far from an isolated incident and this type of thing happens far too often and just like it's not cool here, it's not cool in those other incidents either. But this thread is about this particular situation, which his why we're talking about it and what happens elsewhere doesn't justify this in any way but are just further examples of things that need to change, to nip that one in the bud.
He's 16 is a very valid point for the vast majority candidates at that age. Nothing ageist about it they literally have not had a lot of time to gain work experience. I think it's equally a leap to assume they have valuable work experience at the age of 16. Also, I already said that two years is too long, but what you start with as a candidate and what you earn as experience in the position are different topics. I'm not going to entertain conflating the two.
Experience is not nonsense, its literally what you use across the board from getting new jobs and what you do while on those jobs. I agree it doesn't pay the bills, and that you should do these moves to gain experience with caution. I say this regardless of age. As a developer who has done free work for the experience (and have no regrets, although never for two years) I don't agree with your stance at a high level.