First off, everyone I spoke with was friendly, congenial. I was mostly interviewing with people on the team to which I was applying, so that was very encouraging, but it sounded like the culture was healthy and positive across the org, as well. First round was a basic recruiter phone screen to validate fit. Nice person. Answered all my questions. Second came a take home exercise. Unlike some other take homes I've had, this one was relevant to a typical task at Medium. Take home has a series of automated tests you need to clear. I passed. Next came an interview with the person who would be my direct manager, but he was stepping in as the hiring manager for a further background and culture fit. All typical behavioral STAR type questions. Passed that round. Next was a 5-hour virtual onsite (note: they gave me the option of splitting it over two days, but I preferred to get it all done in one day). This included additional behavior rounds (1 with the VP, Engineering; 1 with a Product Manager; 1 with the hiring manager from round 2 but this time assuming the role of Engineering Manager/my direct manager). There was also a live coding session with another engineer on the team using coderpad -- kind of a combo of solo coding and pair programming. It had been 7 years since I had done a live coding interview, so no doubt I was a little rusty with the nuances of the process, but I solved both problems in the allotted time (note: you can use google, etc., to look up API calls and other documentation if needed). As with the take home, the problem was relevant to work at Medium. Lastly, there was a Systems Design interview to design a typical feature you would find at Medium. All in all, I thought the problems were fair and the people were quality people. Unfortunately, after almost 8 hours of interviews and a good portion of a day for the take home, I was rejected. No problem with the rejection -- there are many talented people out there. However, when I asked for feedback on why I was passed over so that I might be more competitive in future, I got a blanket statement of, "we do not provide feedback." If this were after the first couple of rounds (recruiter and hiring manager) I might understand -- but if a candidate sacrifices that much of their time to the process, I see it as a common courtesy to help them understand the reasons they were rejected. That is the reason for the "neutral" experience rating -- if only they had provided the slightest bit of feedback (tell me to work on my live coding, or systems design, or STAR responses, or whatever) I would have likely given it a positive rating. Medium is a great product and the company culture seems top notch with lots of long-tenure team members, but I will definitely think twice about applying again in future as I'm not generally willing to give up over 12 hours of my time just to be dismissed with nothing more than a form letter. Again, even some cursory feedback would have helped to make it more worth my while. Advice to Medium: you should provide feedback (as much as is reasonably possible) to candidates -- at least those that make it through the final round interviews.