The interview was with one of the DevOps staff. A very pleasant person and probably would be a good teammate. The interview started with describing the current workload and priorities. Nothing out of the ordinary and not very much details but enough to get a feel for it. The interview questions were simple and straightforward.

tl;dr: Recruiter insulted a previous candidate who had previously interviewed and left a review here that was entirely factual, which the recruiter confirmed. Recruiter reached out. I read through Glassdoor and said I wouldn't be interested, particularly given some of the poor reviews and the other DevOps interview here that states the facts about an unrealistic interview process that asks to not use the internet and do some things from scratch. These are not necessarily difficult problems, but they also don't really test skills or experience, and asking candidates to not use the internet is the equivalent of asking the office to work without power. I might be able to remember how to do some of those off the top of my head, but that is then a memorization test. Furthermore, aside from reversing an array, I've literally never had to do any of those things in my entire career and the last time I did some of those was when I was in high school. There are better ways to evaluate candidates that involve asking questions that are actually related to their day-to-day job. It's strange they asked those after the candidate passed a take-home too. Paraphrasing, but the recruiter then defended the interviewers and basically said the candidate was disgruntled. Notably, the candidate had only stated the facts and the recruiter had confirmed those facts. Insulting a candidate is a bad look. And doing so unnecessarily at that, just for stating the facts, is worse.