Just to further clarify my own line of thinking for you, Joey, it was that very last line that tipped the scale just slightly out of the gray area IMO:|
...the link should be illustrative of a post, not the point of the post.
As it was explained to me once when I was confused about this rule, the test is whether a post would be just fine if the link were simply removed. If the post couldn't stand on its own without the vid link, then the shouldn't remain at all.
I also admit to a gray area and this being open to interpretation sometimes. Frankly, I'd prefer to get rid of the restriction altogether, but that would probably cause vid-trading mayhem, lol.