> Am I right in making my judgement call? Or is this NDA practice quite widespread? It is not widespread, but it is very much possible that the NDA was in fact

> Am I right in making my judgement call? Or is this NDA practice quite widespread? It is not widespread, but it is very much possible that the NDA was in fact required if you were discussing certain sensitive subjects that were vital to their business plan / product development / marketing / etc. It is also quite possible that they do discuss such subjects with other interviewees, and the VP didn't really know if you'd be included or not, so he made you sign it as a precaution. Just imagine yourself in VP's shoes. In any case, it's not a big deal assuming the NDA was reasonable, and you are likely off in your negativity.