The interview process was excessively long. It could have easily been conducted panel-style instead of dedicating four hours to back-to-back interviews.

All of the interviews focused on bullet-point topics related to OOP. While the interviewers were generally pleasant, only one engagement felt like a genuine conversation.

My primary concern arose at the conclusion when it was determined I fell into a middle ground between a mid-range and senior engineer. Consequently, they stated they could not offer me the Senior title and the corresponding salary I requested (and currently receive).

Despite the position and work being identical, they were hesitant to "set me up for failure." This seemed rather unreasonable for a large company to be so particular about a $10,000 difference.

I also felt a sting of disappointment due to an old colleague with nearly identical experience who received the Senior title approximately six months prior to my interview. He was afforded the benefit of the doubt within the company, but was a man, so draw your own conclusions.

Regarding the technical interviews, I had a few issues with one particular interviewer.

In one instance, he inquired about "database migration" on my resume, asking what data I migrated. I explained I was referring to Flyway database migrations and provided a brief overview, yet he repeated the question about what data I migrated.

This same interviewer also asked what type of database I would choose for a high API load, a relational or NoSQL. I responded that this was not the sole criterion for such a decision and outlined additional factors that would influence my choice. He then reiterated the same question, clearly aiming for a direct answer.

Overall, he appeared to prioritize fitting answers into a standardized test format rather than evaluating my technical competence as demonstrated in my responses.

Are you familiar with the SOLID principles?

Are you familiar with the 12 Factor App methodology?