There needs to be written (and if given the time I'll write) a yelp specifically for engineering interviews. Only interviewees can give reviews, and reviews wi

There needs to be written (and if given the time I'll write) a yelp specifically for engineering interviews. Only interviewees can give reviews, and reviews will be restricted to binary yes-or-no questions (did they inform you of a decision in 24 hours? Did they try to sell you on the job? Did you still want to work there after you interviewed there? Did it seem probable to you that you had absolutely no chance of getting that job?, etc.). Think of it in terms of a Joel test, only strictly dealing with the hiring process, and publicly (freely) shared. Call it a Matt test. These reviews would be aggregated and allow a new prospective candidate to decide whether it's worth the gamble to take the time to interview with that company (a bet amounting to hundreds of dollars of lost time if they're already employed elsewhere). The goal is to encourage hiring managers to step up their game, cut out the baloney, and quit putting their own staff through breakneck quotas of pointless and feckless interviews. It's also to draw a huge scarlet spotlight on the companies out there that do nothing but interview and never hire. These tirekicker companies are a scourge on the industry and it's a necessary public service that they be identified. If your company is so choosey that it has to go through 100 onsite interviews to pick one candidate, fine, but candidates have a right to know that before they commit to your process.