I had a second‑stage technical interview at Eneba, and the experience was surprisingly unprofessional. The interviewer was clearly reading from a rigid script on his screen and repeatedly asked the same questions in slightly different wording — including a Spark question that I had already answered thoroughly. Instead of evaluating understanding, he seemed to be checking whether I would contradict myself. This is not how a real technical conversation should work. The whole interview felt robotic and disconnected from the actual flow of discussion. When I asked clarifying questions, the interviewer responded with dismissive comments like “you can google it,” which came across as unwillingness to engage. It genuinely felt like he asked “do you have any questions?” only because it was a mandatory step in his script, not because he intended to answer anything. Zero empathy, zero adaptability. I came prepared to speak from real experience without notes or AI assistance. Meanwhile, the interviewer relied heavily on a prepared checklist he couldn’t deviate from. The imbalance made the process feel unfair and poorly designed.

First Round: CV scanning and background -> Extremely welcoming and nice Second Round: Technical and Theoretical Questions -> Professional and friendly Third Round: System Design -> Good but lacked a bit of context and direction Overall, a very good and responsive process.