Generally, clauses that involve illegal acts or can’t be construed in any legally feasible way are not legally binding. A pledge to commit ritual suicide is obviously not legally binding, whether you signed some piece of paper or not.

And sure, they can have that conversation in court. But my understanding is that this contract (that was never signed) is not even what the parties are arguing about in this case. It is a piece of evidence presented to discredit the Ethereum foundation and makes for a good news article.

> Fulton, who had earned a salary of $195,000 in her role at the Ethereum Foundation, sued for disability discrimination, retaliation, interference with her rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act, unfair employment practices and related claims. Her lawsuit notes that the Ethereum Foundation “does not hire or pay its United States staff in its own name,” but instead uses employer-of-record service companies.

> Generally, clauses that involve illegal acts or can’t be construed in any legally feasible way are not legally binding. A pledge to commit ritual suicide is obviously not legally binding, whether you signed some piece of paper or not.

You're looking at this from the wrong direction. The suicide pledge is clearly unenforceable.

"We put jokes in our contracts" invites questions about which other provisions are subtler ones.