I was going to go on a first date when the guy asked me to sign an NDA. He was attempting to be a content creator on YouTube, tiktok, etc., and thought he needed to start “protecting his reputation”. I declined the date.
If it was around the time I suspect, he might’ve been worried about the me too stories that were breaking. Which means he thought his own conduct could’ve been seen as questionable. Which means it was very questionable. So bullet dodged. Hooray for not being one of his sexual assault victims.
Aren’t NDAs unenforceable against illegal conduct anyway? I suppose he could have been covering for gross behavior that wasn’t across the line into full criminality. Either way, what a fuckin dork, I hope his channel sucks.
Such clauses/contracts often are just an empty threat. If enough people believe in its legality, they will act accordingly, so it accomplished its goal.
I am impressed by your resilience that you didn’t immediately swoon over his intelligence, diligence, and confidence, which is what I would strongly presume was his actual expectation.
Yeah, not a unique thing, unfortunately. I worked for a legal resources mill (I’m not a lawyer) that pumped out stuff like basic NDA templates and wills.
I saw a distressing number of men trying to customize templates with statements about allegations of sexual assault will be settled privately, any public accusation of sexual impropriety will result in the woman owing $_ to the guy, etc. Horrible stuff, flashing neon red flag with red fireworks exploding overhead. And not how NDAs work.
I didn’t even read the whole thing, TBH. It’s been a while, I’ll have to see if I still have access via the link he sent me. That’s even more blatantly sleezy than I was thinking. If he actually managed to build any sort of following, they might be interested to see what he attempts to put in his NDAs.
Gross. Well today is a “losing hope in humanity” kind of day.
I don’t have anything very interesting. I’ve been under NDA for various game betas at various times. One of them I’m still technically not allowed to even say there was a beta for me to have been a part of. Namely, the Age of Empires 2 expansion “Return to Rome” which brought Age of Empires 1 gameplay and civs into a separate game mode of AoE2, which had a secret closed beta around January this year.
It’s not quite an NDA, but as a temporary worker for the AEC and ECQ (my state and federal electoral commissions), I’ve been prohibited from expressing a political opinion in public. Exactly how that’s supposed to work I’m not sure. I’ve usually just taken it to mean I can’t comment political stuff on Facebook between the date I accept the role and the date after the election (Lemmy and previously Reddit being pseudonymous, I’ve never cared much about following the political neutrality requirements here). People who know my IRL know my politics, so if it comes up during that time I usually just say “I’m not actually allowed to talk about that” with a wink.
The AEC and ECQ are government bodies here in Australia, that regulate elections (AEC is the Australia Electoral Commission - the federal body - and the ECQ is the Electoral Commission of Queensland - the state body for Queensland’s elections).
When you sign up to assist as a temporary worker (eg. election scrutineer, etc), you’re bound by very specific terms as an employee of the government.
I once signed up to help out with our national census, which made me a temporary employee of the Australian Bureau of Statistics - the ABS. The terms in that agreement were similar to the above commenter’s experience, I reckon, as we were also required to be politically impartial in public (among other things).
Eh, when you’re literally performing the job of runnkng the election—giving people ballots and counting the results after—I think it’s pretty reasonable to have a requirement of maintaining an appearance of political neutrality.
It depends on how you read it. It’s probably a Hatch act mirror or the Hatch Act itself. If so, it only applies when he is representing his employer or giving the appearance of using his position to influence. It all gets Grey and muddy real quick, especially in a position like that.
I had to Google it, but it looks like the Hatch Act is American law? So unless there’s a similarly-named law here that does the same thing, I don’t think it’s relevant.
Add comment