I provided multiple solutions to the interviewers, and my solutions passed all the test cases, and the feedback result was a “lack of the ability to analyze and solve the problem”. I spoke out loud and well explained to interviewers my thought before I implement them in code, and I was communicating and making assumptions while I am coding, and the feedback result was a “lack of communication”. I asked the interviewers which solutions they prefer, gave them the choice, and their answer was “up to you”, and the feedback result was “did not listen to the tips from interviewers, and still go ahead with candidate’s thoughts”. To be honest, that is the same strategy I was using to pass the same technical screen in the second round, analyzed the problem, made assumptions on edge cases, provided solutions to them, and let them pick the one they like then I will implement it. And I don’t understand why I am getting totally opposite feedback in this onsite pair coding round. If you disagree with my strategy/style, please fail me in the second round, not after spending weeks prepared and rejected with this ridiculous excuse, thank you. Other than the unhappy experience in onsite’s pair coding, there is another thing I would like to mention. I was applying for the Intermediate level(L4), but my onsite interview title was scheduled as Senior level(L5) and I got rejected for the reason “below the bar”, seriously? The recruiter told me that they were using this system to hire other similar positions, and I should not worry about it, but I still was not sure about the bar interviewers used on my evaluations(L4 or L5), the final onsite process is really unprofessional for me.