[vechagup]

> he also seemed unwilling to push at all, just said "okay!" in a sing-song voice that implied "yeah whatever, go die"

Is the idea here that you wanted the interviewer to beg you to stay on the call?

I interview for a BigCo. Most of us do it not because we love interviewing but because 1) It's a way to check the "citizenship" box on performance reviews. 2) A director or VP sent a mass email exhorting us to join the interviewer pool. Everyone I know in fact views interviewing as a chore that takes away from one's day job. But, there's standardized training and emphasis on objective tests and rubrics to minimize bias. Given this assembly line process and the fact that most interviewers want to be elsewhere, there's very little reason to expect a random interviewer to want to sell you on continuing a process that you consider yourself above.

If a candidate proclaimed that they didn't agree to the terms of one of my interviews midway through, I'd certainly exchange a few words with them to try to make them more comfortable, but in the end I would by fine with bidding them farewell and being glad that writing up that interview feedback would be easy.

[blisterpeanuts]

I mean, yeah, you're probably right. I might have stayed on the call if he'd explained why the actual code was necessary, could even have met me halfway by saying "Yeah, I know it's kind of silly, but it's a requirement. Would you mind doing this, and then we can get on to more interesting stuff?" Or something like that, but he didn't have any kind of friendly or diplomatic response, maybe I was feeling impatient that day; I honestly can't remember because this was like 10 years ago.

[vechagup]

Yeah, one consequence of hiring exclusively based on technical skill is that you end up with some employees that are empathy challenged. My employer recently added one "are you a human?" interview to every loop presumably for this reason.