I recently went through the full interview process with Bunny.net and wanted to share an honest review for future candidates. Overall, I found the process somewhat inconsistent and, at times, misleading in terms of expectations. One of the main points was that the 'final interview' that was clearly described as a “conversation” and explicitly stated not to be a test. However, in practice, it felt very much like a structured evaluation, with interviewers reading questions from the screen rather than engaging in a natural discussion. This created a disconnect between what was communicated and what actually happened. In terms of preparation, I made a strong effort to engage with the company beyond the basics. I follow their content on LinkedIn, interact with their posts, explored and tested their dashboard, provided feedback, answered their eNPS, and even referenced internal phrases mentioned in their own materials during the process. Despite this, I received feedback suggesting I lacked sufficient product exploration, which felt inconsistent with the level of effort demonstrated. The process itself also lacked stability. There were multiple changes along the way, including rescheduling, changes in interview participants, and even shifts in the role expectations. While occasional changes are understandable, the frequency here negatively impacted the overall experience and clarity. Another point that stood out was the feedback regarding “long-term alignment with support.” I have 8 years of experience in support, which reflects a consistent career path in this field. Additionally, I explicitly expressed interest in growing within the company (including asking about long-term opportunities and internal career progression). Given that context, the conclusion about lack of long-term alignment felt superficial. Finally, I was also evaluated on alignment with the company’s mission, despite it not being highlighted as a preparation requirement at any stage. When it was brought up, I asked for clarification and was able to connect it to my work approach immediately. Using this as a deciding factor, especially in a conversation that was not supposed to be a test, felt disproportionate. To summarize, while the team is professional and the product itself is interesting, the interview process lacks consistency, clarity, and alignment between expectations and execution. Candidates are encouraged to over-prepare and verify assumptions, as the process may differ from what is communicated. Overall experience: Bad Key concerns: Process inconsistency, unclear expectations, and subjective evaluation criteria.