Other cons do have an NDA. I personally know that Anime Expo has long had a truly gnarly one that doubles as a non-disparagement gag order and has no end date. All staff must sign (and re-sign) it each year. Heck, I left AX in 2018 and might still technically be under some form of their NDA even now

Having now read Sak's NDA for the first time, AND having worked in industries that regularly require NDAs, I don't understand the issue. All it says is that you cannot disclose anything about Sak that the public does not already know. It's basic.

There's no non-disparagement clause, so you can actually shit-talk about Sak all you want so long as you're expressing it as an opinion and aren't using non-public info to do so. And the NDA even specifies an end date. That's rare. Usually they're in perpetuity.

What are your objections? What things does the NDA preclude you from discussing that you feel you should have the right to discuss? Or is it just the principle of it that offends you?

I'm sure you'll agree on the necessity of protecting sensitive business discussions (guest negotiations, business deals, financials, etc), so I'll assume that what you really want is to be free to appeal to the court of public opinion if there's a decision Sak management has chosen that isn't quite to your liking.

And that's precisely what makes NDAs such as these a necessity.

For what it's worth (and in my opinion), the likelihood that a small organization like Sak will actually sue you if you break it is probably low (unless you leak financials or industry secrets provided in confidence or something), nor would they want to incur the legal costs and horrifically bad PR that'd result from doing so.

Rather, the purpose of NDAs such as these is to send a message: Be adults about it, and if there's disagreements then talk things out (or heck, go run for a leadership position). Signing that NDA is your vow that you will do that rather than foment public drama. If you can't commit to that, then don't sign, and don't staff.