Perguntas de entrevista da empresa Moralis Web3

I applied for the Developer Advocate role and received a request to complete a technical assignment. The task was to create a 2 to 4 minute video demonstrating a basic implementation of their API products, along with the corresponding code. Although it was presented as a quick 1 or 2 hour task, producing high-quality technical content requires a significant time investment. After I submitted the materials, the recruitment team confirmed receipt and stated I would receive feedback. After several weeks of silence, I sent a follow-up email. I received a standard rejection the following day, thanking me for the effort I put into the video. Despite the thank-you note, I was able to verify that the video had not been viewed. Furthermore, the rejection cited a lack of in-depth API knowledge. This feedback was fundamentally flawed: the assignment itself was only designed to show a basic API call, and my resume clearly outlines extensive, in-depth experience with APIs. The fact that the only substantive feedback provided was inaccurate, combined with the fact that the video was never watched, indicates that neither my technical submission nor my resume was properly reviewed. I reached out to address these discrepancies, but my email went unanswered. Candidates should consider that the significant effort required for this technical assignment was not met with an actual review of the work. For a company that targets the developer community, the decision to provide feedback without evaluating the submitted materials or the candidate's background is a point of concern.