The initial response from the recruiter included the three questions mentioned by another - developer tool experience, developer role in the next 5 years, and considerations for enterprise. These made sense as they were very relevant to the position and gave you an opportunity to demonstrate knowledge of the software trends in the developer tool space (and I was pretty satisfied with my answers). The second response said that they were "very interested in your skills and experience", with the invite for the screen with the recruiter. I did my homework with the current product set, and conducted the interview. The recruiter specifically stated that I should not repeat anything on my resume (because he had it in front of him), and then asked some basic questions about working with UX team, mentoring colleagues, and the gotcha questions: why did you apply, have you read the handbook/what did you like best, example of professional failure, and why you left the last 3 jobs. When it was my turn to ask questions, I asked about specifics for the position, and the recruiter simply replied "no" - he didn't have any details about what areas of the product I would be working on, and implied that would be handled in the next round. We had some basic salary discussions - usually an indication that you would move to the next step. Third response - the "not moving forward" email, with some friendly words about keeping in touch (whatever that means). There was no offer of feedback as to why I wasn't moving forward - just a link to a survey. So, to summarize: 1) Initial questionnaire asking for domain knowledge. 2) Initial screen request that indicates interest (and a strong resume). 3) Initial screen with no substantive questions about the position, or specifics about the role, but some questions that apparently are to answer "character questions", which if answered incorrectly, instantly disqualify you from further consideration. I have never done an interview where the person interviewing did not know any details about the position they were interviewing me for (and still asking questions specific to the domain area). It's pretty clear that the primary purpose of the initial screen is to get the answers to the aforementioned "character questions" to determine your fit for the Gitlab "way", regardless of the strength of your resume, or the quality of your answers to preliminary questions. Their accessible documentation and perception of openness seems very positive, but this experience reminds me more of a cult than a company. I too am very skeptical of the obsessively positive reviews of the company.