Crossover for Work interview questions

it was not good infant pathetic experience . I had 5 rounds cleared all, then an interview was scheduled, then it got rescheduled and on the day of interview no one came in the meeting, on checking n mail I was told there was a technical problem and interview will be rescheduled. no rescheduling happened only an apology mail came saying your application could not be approved . it would be good if people were a little transparent. These elementary rounds cause a wastage of time of both the parties. I wish you take a look at this

TRUST GLASSDOOR RATINGS. THE NEGATIVE REVIEWS THIS CODE MILL HAS HERE ARE WHAT IT ACTUALLY IS. I applied for a Software Architect position and was given an online portal that has interview stages. The real interview starts at stage 3 which they call Cognitive Aptitude test. Basically it's a series of 50 questions asked on a 15-min time limit. According to them, they claim that those questions, which are by the way a bunch of puzzles and simple mathematical questions which while not difficult may still require you to use something like a calculator, which of course you are not allowed. They themselves know very well that it's almost impossible for you to complete the questions in a 15 min time span and they even state this before the test begins. They claim that you won't be penalized for any wrong answers but that's where the first penalty comes. This just shows the amount of SHEER DISHONESTY that is part of the standard operating procedures of crossover. When you fail to reach their cutoff mark for that "cognitive" test, immediately the test ends, you get a screen in big bold red writing stating "YOU'VE FAILED". I've done interviews with some FAANG companies, plus many other companies of different sizes, but I've never seen the kind of utter stupidity portrayed by the crossover interview process. This kind of interview process which is meant to trip anybody who doesn't piece up puzzles of shapes in record time not only exposes the "cool company" nonsense that crossover claims to be, but also lays bare how broken the company is. The methodological approach in which proper software is developed doesn't bear any semblance with what they are trying to deduce from that piece of crap they call aptitude tests. And I state this with confidence as someone who's done a lot of technical interviews and I've seen how they don't have any relation with real-life software construction process.