I had an unpleasant experience in the application process, which was partially resolved by writing a post on Glassdoor detailing my complaints. (Note, this is the edited Glassdoor post as I later found my original post to be inaccurate when more information emerged) The application process is a fairly standard 30 minute screening interview with one person, followed by a coding assessment, and then further technical interviews (which I didn't get to). I was severely dissatisfied with how the technical assessment was handled. After getting a screening interview arranged, completed, and then being set the technical assessment in a few days, I was hopeful of a quick process. The technical assessment was a coding challenge based around the Connect 4 game. Candidates are given 3 days to complete it, and I spent most of a Saturday ensuring I had written a working and efficient solution - with my expectation that the efficiency of my algorithm would be key to my success or failure at this stage of the interview process. Having been given a 3 day deadline to complete the task, I was hopeful for quick feedback. It took almost 2 weeks to hear back, and I was left thinking Yobota had shown me little respect in their process. Only later (following my initial Glassdoor post) did I find out that my recruiter had obscured the reasonings behind the delay, and Yobota had in fact provided a result in around 3 days. However, I was left to believe the delays were all on Yobota's end. There was some reasoning behind my recruiters actions, but I was certainly lied to, and he would have been able to get away with it were it not for me kicking up a storm on Glassdoor (where I blamed Yobota for the delays, due to the false information I had been given). I was rejected based on my poor coding standards, which on balance was fair enough, and not what this post is about. However, I was bitterly disappointed not to (initially) get any feedback on whether my code was functional, if it had passed any/all of their test cases, and how it profiled for efficiency. Again, it was only my Glassdoor post that prompted extra feedback to finally find out that my code did pass both their functional and speed tests. Another grievance of mine was feedback regarding my comments in my 'readme' file that I had included with my submission (where you are encouraged to discuss how you solved the problem, and what areas you found challenging etc). I had stated: "Firstly, I found the problem to be interesting and relatable/realistic... I was slightly disappointed that the possibility of an 'Illegal continue' in a game, as this changes the solution..." My feedback had jumped on the word 'disappointed' and mentioned it a couple of time, for example: "most offputting is the candidate's readme in which he describes the problem as 'disappointing'". I considered it most unfair as, in my opinion, I had actually described the problem as "interesting and relatable/realistic". It later transpired that not all of the feedback was meant for me (seems strange), so it is possible I wasn't meant to see these comments but I felt they were harsh nevertheless. In summary, I found the process: - Slow and was given misinformation from my recruiter - Some crucial areas of feedback to be missing (initially) - Some unfair feedback comments - Writing a Glassdoor review is about the only leverage you have, and was a success in my opinion. I got to find out further feedback that I desired, as well as uncovering the truth in my application process.