[mytaa]

I don't think it's as black and white as you put it here. A lot of it depends on the exact needs of the company.

Ability to solve algorithmic problems can indicate ability to find quick solutions to novel problems. I'm not sure how else could you test for it? Not everything can be googled, learnt quickly or have step by step instructions.

I think the "likability" also depends a lot on the job. Some jobs are more client facing, communication and mentoring than others. I don't think one is required to crack jokes, display complete confidence and have ability to discuss any topic, but there are definitely things you should not do. I'm not good at making friends and I dislike talking to people even though I don't show it, but I can still show myself in a positive light during interviews. I can pull the weight for 1 hour if I have prepared for it.

Not sure what was exactly meant with the "mansplaining" part, but I find this term extremely gross and unnecessary.

[world32]

Algorithm challenges / whiteboard coding is a whole debate in itself. In fairness there are arguments on both sides I think.

As for likeability or having friends at university - I really don't think that is a fair thing to judge somebody on at all when interviewing for a programming position. I agree absolutely that personal skills and emotional intelligence are necessary for the job but being likeable? In a professional environment that should not matter one bit. Its also completely subjective.

And yes, the whole mansplaining thing is really quite obnoxious.

[why_only_15]

I think the argument for looking for likeability is that if everyone on the team likes one another then they probably work better together professionally. In my understanding the primary pitfall of this is that it can exclude perfectly competent developers. Not everyone needs to be friends.