The overall interview process was quite smooth and healthy, largely thanks to the HR representative, who was very supportive. I had requested to complete the process as soon as possible, and she was proactive in finding the nearest available slot and rescheduling my interview accordingly. However, my experience with the interviewer was disappointing. I prefer not to name the individual, as I don’t wish to impact anyone’s career, but I found the interaction unprofessional. The interviewer appeared dismissive and argumentative, often challenging valid technical points without basis. For instance, when I stated that an increase in index size could affect both read and write operations—a factually correct statement—he disagreed without proper reasoning. There were similar arguments around SOLID principles and other basic topics, which I found lacked depth and technical understanding. Moreover, the interview deviated significantly from my profile, and more than 60% of the time was wasted on unproductive debates rather than evaluating relevant skills. This seemed to stem from a combination of insecurity and insufficient technical preparation on the interviewer's part. As a constructive suggestion, I recommend that interviews be recorded or include 2–3 panel members to ensure fairness, accountability, and a more balanced assessment. I could have shared this feedback right after the interview, but I chose to let it go at the time. However, upon reflection, I realized it's important to speak up—not just for the benefit of future candidates, but also for the company’s own improvement.