Had the initial screen with a recruiter who was great to chat with. I could tell he was really excited to work there and genuinely excited to have me going through the interview loop, which was great.

After that, there was a system design question with an engineer.

Moved forward to a conversation with someone in eng leadership, which is where the process turned negative for me. The interview was pushed from 20 minutes to 15 because the interviewer had to leave early. The person interviewing me seemed rushed, and I got the impression they didn't want to be there. The content was just really vague questions about how you prioritize user features.

Got rejected at this point, which is fine. I didn't really think the interview went well anyway.

My complaint is that a rejection from such a short and rushed interview, after two extended conversations, feels like a waste of my time and the other interviewers' time. If that's enough to override positive feedback from the other, much more extended steps, then it should happen first in my opinion.

Personally, I'm not sure how this structure of an interview can provide a very useful signal, but if it's an important part of the process for them, it should happen first.

design PostHog from a scale of 100 events a month to increasing volume. Being familiar with their architecture is really helpful, and their documentation is great, so there's not much of an excuse to not be.