Exabyting’s interview process can be lengthy and demanding, with multiple technical and psychological rounds that may feel excessive. In my case, most of the 4–5 interviews were scheduled during regular office hours, often in the middle of the workday, making it difficult to manage alongside my existing job. This may be challenging for other working candidates as well. After completing all stages and aligning on general terms, one would normally expect the process to move smoothly toward closure. During the final phase, I raised a small and respectful query about scheduling logistics, after which the direction of the process changed unexpectedly and did not progress further. The explanation focused largely on behavioral interpretations and placed responsibility on the candidate side rather than addressing the broader context, which was discouraging given the time and effort invested. From my perspective, hiring decisions appeared highly centralized, and the final interactions sometimes felt subjective rather than purely based on technical evaluation or fit. The “interview board review,” intended to track candidate progress, can feel as though it supports the rejection decision and frames concerns around the candidate, especially since the documentation is prepared internally. Although the company collects feedback from rejected candidates to improve the process, similar concerns seem to recur without clear visible changes. At the same time, their HR and marketing teams present a polished image on LinkedIn and Facebook, frequently highlighting culture and work environment. Based on my experience, this public image does not fully reflect the candidate experience. However, I have heard positive reviews from individuals who have already joined and witnessed a good work culture.